Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
4E is unacceptable
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 4427864" data-attributes="member: 7635"><p>Adventures serve as a great example; they assume a certain power curve (by nature, they need to write to a baseline) but it goes further than that.</p><p></p><p>3.5 assumes 13 "combat worthy" encounters of equal challenge rating to advance a level. The encounters could be negotiations, sneakery, or melee, but they are, in essence, as difficult as a combat with an equal foe. This is all the core rules reward. </p><p></p><p>The game assumes that X level PC can handle X level challenge. An 18th level PC (with his party) can face a CR 18 monster, and live. </p><p></p><p>The problem with sub-optimal choices is that the PC =/= to his level. Our 10/10 fighter/wizard (or sub in any poor choice combo) doesn't take blows like a fighter nor deal damage like a wizard could in those situations. When dealing with each role (fighting, casting) he's little better than a PC 1/2 his level. And due to the economy of actions (one standard action a round) he doesn't even count for two PCs. His vaunted versatility is useless because he sucks in both roles.</p><p></p><p>(Prove my point: create a party of 10th level single-classed PCs. Give them level 20 treasure and double their hp. Now, let them fight a Balor. See if they win). </p><p></p><p>So the SYSTEM ITSELF (and its inherent assumptions) begin to break down. The PC is =/= to his level, so challenges equal to his level are actually harder than anticipated. He cannot penetrate monster defenses. He cannot locate or disarm traps. He cannot remove/negate the status ailments monsters produce. </p><p></p><p>So the DM has to compensate. Weaker monsters. Weaker traps. Dice Fudging. The CR/EL goes off the rails. You need more weaker encounters than 13 to level. Appropriate challenges slowly increase the chance of TPK. </p><p></p><p>Basically, the system and all its balancing assumptions goes out the window. </p><p></p><p>Modules show this glaring weakness best by being neutral. The DM has to let the dice fall where they may, or seriously alter them (and thus show how much he must deviate from baseline assumptions) to make these sub-optimal PCs work. </p><p></p><p>If you are the type of DM who either a.) tolerates rampant PC death OR b.) uses a nontraditional setup to insure the game remains "balanced" then this is a non-issue. You have gone a fixed the issue your own way. However, the core rules of the game shouldn't require such patches to work just because of booby-trap PCs. There is no warning that "even multi-classing may make your PC less effective" in the PHB, no "DMs must do this to compensate for floundering PCs" in the DMG. It assumes that such a PC is equal to the rest. That is not true. </p><p></p><p>I guess in essence, my point is that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Such characters are the weak link, and it then falls to others (other PCs, the DM) to compensate for that weak link somehow. I much prefer a system that doesn't allow for so many weak links, even at the expense of "customizing" because knowing my fellow players can do their job well makes me a better player and DM.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Remathilis, post: 4427864, member: 7635"] Adventures serve as a great example; they assume a certain power curve (by nature, they need to write to a baseline) but it goes further than that. 3.5 assumes 13 "combat worthy" encounters of equal challenge rating to advance a level. The encounters could be negotiations, sneakery, or melee, but they are, in essence, as difficult as a combat with an equal foe. This is all the core rules reward. The game assumes that X level PC can handle X level challenge. An 18th level PC (with his party) can face a CR 18 monster, and live. The problem with sub-optimal choices is that the PC =/= to his level. Our 10/10 fighter/wizard (or sub in any poor choice combo) doesn't take blows like a fighter nor deal damage like a wizard could in those situations. When dealing with each role (fighting, casting) he's little better than a PC 1/2 his level. And due to the economy of actions (one standard action a round) he doesn't even count for two PCs. His vaunted versatility is useless because he sucks in both roles. (Prove my point: create a party of 10th level single-classed PCs. Give them level 20 treasure and double their hp. Now, let them fight a Balor. See if they win). So the SYSTEM ITSELF (and its inherent assumptions) begin to break down. The PC is =/= to his level, so challenges equal to his level are actually harder than anticipated. He cannot penetrate monster defenses. He cannot locate or disarm traps. He cannot remove/negate the status ailments monsters produce. So the DM has to compensate. Weaker monsters. Weaker traps. Dice Fudging. The CR/EL goes off the rails. You need more weaker encounters than 13 to level. Appropriate challenges slowly increase the chance of TPK. Basically, the system and all its balancing assumptions goes out the window. Modules show this glaring weakness best by being neutral. The DM has to let the dice fall where they may, or seriously alter them (and thus show how much he must deviate from baseline assumptions) to make these sub-optimal PCs work. If you are the type of DM who either a.) tolerates rampant PC death OR b.) uses a nontraditional setup to insure the game remains "balanced" then this is a non-issue. You have gone a fixed the issue your own way. However, the core rules of the game shouldn't require such patches to work just because of booby-trap PCs. There is no warning that "even multi-classing may make your PC less effective" in the PHB, no "DMs must do this to compensate for floundering PCs" in the DMG. It assumes that such a PC is equal to the rest. That is not true. I guess in essence, my point is that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Such characters are the weak link, and it then falls to others (other PCs, the DM) to compensate for that weak link somehow. I much prefer a system that doesn't allow for so many weak links, even at the expense of "customizing" because knowing my fellow players can do their job well makes me a better player and DM. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
4E is unacceptable
Top