Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CleverNickName" data-source="post: 5929227" data-attributes="member: 50987">Well, there is also simplicity of math.&nbsp; One of the most common complaints with 3.x and 4E games was the amount of math you had to use.&nbsp; &quot;Roll 1d20, then add your ability mod, then another mod, then another mod, subtract this mod, add another...&quot;&nbsp; It was tedious to keep track of, it was easy to make mistakes, it slowed the game down, and it made game balance more difficult as the levels increased.&nbsp; Trying to balance an encounter for a party of four, 1st level characters is easy...balancing an encounter for a party of five, 12th level characters requires a lot of fuzzy math, broad assumptions, and &quot;on the fly&quot; changes during combat.But isn't balance enough of a reason?&nbsp; The balance issue isn't going to be resolved unless they find a way to level the math at the very core of the game.&nbsp; The easiest way (and best, in my opinion) to do this is to cap the ability scores.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CleverNickName, post: 5929227, member: 50987"] Well, there is also simplicity of math. One of the most common complaints with 3.x and 4E games was the amount of math you had to use. "Roll 1d20, then add your ability mod, then another mod, then another mod, subtract this mod, add another..." It was tedious to keep track of, it was easy to make mistakes, it slowed the game down, and it made game balance more difficult as the levels increased. Trying to balance an encounter for a party of four, 1st level characters is easy...balancing an encounter for a party of five, 12th level characters requires a lot of fuzzy math, broad assumptions, and "on the fly" changes during combat. But isn't balance enough of a reason? The balance issue isn't going to be resolved unless they find a way to level the math at the very core of the game. The easiest way (and best, in my opinion) to do this is to cap the ability scores. [/QUOTE]

Verification