Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6089577" data-attributes="member: 6696971">ON TOPIC:  My position on this is the same as my position in the the Warlord thread.  The "Rally" needs to be in play and there are only so many ways to accomplish that; (i) intra-combat healing, (ii) pro-active or reactive deployable mitigation effects (iii) refreshable/triggered nova capabilities. If 5e doesn't have (i), then it really needs to have a healthy assemblage of (ii) and (iii) or combats are just going to be little more than an HP-ablating/tree-chopping contests.  If that turns out to be the case, my guess is that 5e will lose a large cross-section of the D&D crowd it hopes to court.DIVERGENT NONSENSE TO NOT READ:   @<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?27160-Balesir" target="_blank">Balesir</a> Gotcha.  Well, a couple things.1)  I wasn't comparing 4e's "wieldiness" with respect to PC inflation relative to prior editions.  I was comparing it to itself and my own sense of its sweet-spot; 4 - 5 PCs.  My group has 3 PCs and without a doubt it is outside of the sweet spot of the edition; but we manager perfectly well.2)  My experience is considerable with 3 and 4 PCs, decent bit with 5 and marginal with 6.  No experience with 7 or more.3)  As such, my thoughts are merely hypothesis based on my own experience and extrapolation/deduction, the consistent testimony of folks who call 4e combat a "grind" seem to share those issues in common.4)  Given that you have far more experience than I do with 7 PCs and obviously have considerable experience with the ruleset (and presumably your players are the same), I would have to defer to your thoughts on this scenario and would gladly do so.However, I do wonder if you suffer from many of those outlined issues so you can maybe indulge me.1)  Fighters have a strong secondary Striker tendency and can be flat out built as alpha Strikers.  If neither of your Fighters are Sword and Board (even those can be built as strong secondary strikers) and/or if either are built to be alpha Strikers.2)  You have no pure Leader and an abundance of primary Strikers, secondary Strikers and a Wizard (which in a game where there are as many enemies as you would have in the encounter budget expectations of 7 + PCs, they would easily be Strikers given their potential DPR).3)  I doubt, given your experience with the ruleset, that you guys bog down at all in the time:turn ratio.So, I'm not sure you suffer from two of the main problems; too many pure defenders and too many pure leaders with no synergy - eg Lazy-lord + Slayer/Barbarian or Radiant Mafia.  If you build a Radiant Mafia + a group underwritten by Lazy-lord + Slayer synergy then the efficiency should go up with numbers rather than down.  Secondarily, see 3 above.  Without those 2 main issues in play, the wieldiness difference of 7 PCs, vs 4-5, is likely marginal at best.  You can correct me if I'm wrong about any of that.  Again, your experience in this domain is more than my own (considerable:0).  I'm just Thomas Jefferson building attempting to build a plow on mechanical extrapolation/deduction with no practical experience.</blockquote>

Verification