Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Elder-Basilisk" data-source="post: 3735723" data-attributes="member: 3146">Is it really widely acknowledged that the CR/EL system breaks down when dealing with very large numbers of enemies? I don't acknowledge that for numbers up to 20 or so. Designing encounters that involve multiple weaker enemies requires a bit of creativity, but if you do it well, the CR/EL system can give results that are roughly as good for mid-sized groups of foes as it does anywhere else.Now, if 4e makes it easier to use large numbers of creatures against the PCs, that could be good. On the other hand, there are a few issues:1. I don't much like the idea that first level characters can take on 20 goblins at once in a fair fight without too much challenge. Where is there to go from there? There's only so many supers you can put in front of "bad ass" before the exercise gets dull. IMO, when your fourth level character can look at 20 goblins and say "we can take them easily" there's a sense of accomplishment and growth there that is a good thing. 2. Starting the power scale high also strains the credibility of a campaign world. If first level adventurers can take out dozens of goblins, how could they threaten the village? And if ordinary folks are so weak that the goblins are a threat, how do they survive in a world that also contains threats for 6th level characters in numbers great enough to generate 20 monster encounters on a regular basis? And, for that matter, how does the city watch or the town sheriff keep PCs in line? (Presumably PCs either get the invincible trait very early or (as is more likely since that is what happened in 1e and 2e which had the same official power difference between PCs and NPCs as the 20 goblins aren't too bad for first level adventurers but would wipe out a village scenario) published worlds will suddenly fill up with mid level PC types in law enforcement and authority positions, thus reversing the problem). Then again, maybe the ability to create logical and self-consistent campaign worlds in not a design value in 4.0--most everything I've seen in the previews seems to indicate that it's not a concern of the designers).3. Facilitating large numbers of opponents vs. a group of PCs encounters requires balancing two competing goals: the ability of the monsters to do something interesting to the PCs (as opposed to simply attacking and fishing for 20's) and the ability of the PCs to survive the larger number of monsters. There may be ways to balance the two (higher attack bonuses, lower damage, for instance), but a perfect solution to the dilemma seems like the elusive square circle.4. Facilitating larger numbers of opponents may be possible through streamlined rules, but there's only so much you can streamline.On the whole, Mearls' article seemed like he was setting up a straw man (I, for one, have not had too much trouble setting up dynamic encounters with multiple foes in 3.x), and then claiming that 4e is going to make it easy for DMs to set up square circles. Color me unimpressed.</blockquote>

Verification