Search results

What’s the counterargument then? @Lanefan made a bald-faced claim that was also wrong and didn’t provide any evidence for it. I disputed the claim and justified my reasoning: the evidence of high-level monsters and challenges means that it is possible to increase the challenge of a campaign...

Then you aren’t responding to the argument, you are inventing a new one. The comment that touched off the reponse, and that you agreed with was: It IS easier to up the challenge in an « easy » game than to downgrade the challenge in a « hard » game, particularly for the experienced DMs that...

You don’t have to remove anything to challenge players, just ramp up the difficulty. Setting the monsters both in number and difficulty has always been 100% within the DM’s purview. You’re ignoring the fact that in an less challenging system, you still start at low levels and monsters exist...

No. It’s far easier for a DM to make a softball game more difficult than the reverse. Throw an adult red dragon against a 1st level party in any edition of the game. See how well the party does.

It’s a pretty meaningless statement to say that if you preplan everything, the mechanical act of updating your character sheet is quick, especially if you exclude the time necessary at level 1 to create your character. Meanwhile, I gave up creating my level 1 Mastermind Rogue after 1 hour and I...

PF2 does not have a lightning quick levelling system.

If you need to redefine terms to mean the opposite of what they mean in arithmetic, you might be choosing complexity for complexity’s sake.

You, of course, mean lower than -10, which is exactly the problem.

I started playing at age 10 in 1989. It definitely seems that even in the late ‘80s, the target audience was teens, not college-age students.

Your definition of gatekeeping makes virtually impossible to criticize ANYTHING as gatekeeping, since it depends on the mental state on the person who is gatekeeping, which is known only to them.

Typo. I meant the 4e gnome video.

Yes, my approach is both to remove about 50% of the encounters and to replace the monsters of the remaining encounters rather than attempt converting them.

I agree with @Swarmkeeper. I don’t think you can divorce « arguments have been made » from the weight of those arguments. Elsewise, you end up with journalists reporting « some people believe the Earth is flat. » So, it is insufficient to simply repeat the claim « some grognards believe that...

I second the idea of simply replacing the AP monsters with 5e equivalents rather than converting them (except maybe for a signature ability). The lift is generally not worth the time and effort.

The fact that even the people defending descending AC refer to it as « esoteric ».

Legacy of Fire. It was fun, but you absolutely have to rip the guts out of the adventure to make it work. The ideas and the concepts are great, but there are just SO. MANY. FIGHTS. that are an everlasting slog if you don’t skip them.

Well, I’ve provided my citations, I invite you to provide yours.

The specific criticism that was made was that there is a history of people, including WotC, treating grognards poorly. When pressed for examples of WotC treating grognards poorly (an extraordinary claim as the 5e designers are grognards themselves), only two examples were given: THAC0 the...

Fortunately, modern D&D does not use XP for GP as a mechanic. The point I’m making is that the people claiming « modern D&D doesn’t cater to all playstyles » are conveniently forgetting that neither did older D&D.

You disagreed with @Hussar ’s statement that a group of gamers felt aggrieved because the character THAC0 the clown in « Beyond the Witchlight » and requested a citation. @Hussar was probably referring to Mournblade’s post at 757, which I will not cite because he was booted from the thread for...