Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 6634387" data-attributes="member: 2067">"Unique" was probably not the best choice of words (though I might say EVERY table is unique, certainly looking to D&D for challenge-fun isn't unique). But if you're significantly twisting the game to get that experience, you are playing in a way that is going to produce a much different play experience from most other tables. Even folks who pursue challenge-based gameplay out of D&D don't do it the same way. For instance, some make dungeon survival the challenge rather than lopsided combats.Everyone plays the game their way, but the scope of house rule can be different from table to table. What I'm kind of getting at is that when you make pretty significant tweaks to the game - like laughing off encounter guidelines so you have a more binary challenge experience - you have to expect that to change your play experience relative to a group who does not. It then sort of introduces a caveat whenever you talk about your experience that someone who doesn't tweak the game like that doesn't have. You can talk about multiple concurrent buffs being necessary in your experience, but your experience is wildly out of whack fights, it's a bit of a "well, yeah," kind of moment. Clearly the game wasn't meant to do what you do with it - break one significant rule and you'll probably have to break others! This is why in my talk about dragonfights, I add the caveat of "well, we had dragon allies and high-damage dragon-slaying weapons when we went up against big ones," because I can be reasonably confident that this isn't a lot of tables' experience. That doesn't mean the rule has a problem in and of itself. It doesn't mean dragons are weak just because my party of 6th level characters took down a party of 5 dragons including two adults. It just means we found the encounter a little on the easy side. But you know, two dragonlances and three adult dragons helped us out, so well, yeah, that would be our experience.I don't think it's controversial to say that D&D 5e wasn't built to give people who seek success in massively unbalanced encounters a satisfying experience. That doesn't seem to be among its design goals. It's not an asymmetric skirmish game. It doesn't bill itself that way. If it was meant to be played that way, you'd see different rules in place. If that's what you're seeking out of the game, you'll have to expect that you're going to have a distorted experience relative to a group whose changes are less significant.That's not a problem, but it does sort of mean when you say "ranged is OP," or "concentration is too limiting," that this isn't always an issue with the game, it may have become an issue because of the ways you're altering the game. When you're trying to kill a single creature 5 CR's above your level on a regular basis, yeah, that makes sense that that would be your experience - the damage output it has in melee is high and it's defenses require a huuuuuuuuuuuge bonus to hit that only buffs can provide.</blockquote>

Verification