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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="triqui" data-source="post: 6003370" data-attributes="member: 57948">It's just a matter of taste. It depends on if you want *system* verosimilitude, or *story* verosimilitude.Let's take an ogre as an example. Story wise, I might want my ogre to be a sluggish, bad fighter that swing and miss a lot, with a relatively high damage when he luckily connects.In a 4e style of approach (story verosimilitude), you make it a brute, give him low accuracy, and high damage and hp with low AC.In a 3e style of approach (system verosimilitude), you can't. Because the Ogre *is* very strong, which, systemwise, translate in a high attack bonus. Also translate into a high damage bonus. You can't really play that much with his Hit Dice, which are quite low, and you don't really have a lot of room to reduce them to get a lower BAB (his BAB is a very small part of his total attack bonus anyways). So, in the end, your 3e style ogre does not work like the "story" suggests (low accuracy, high damage), but like the "system" forces him to (high accuracy, high damage). It also makes Ogres one of the worst rated CR in the game. It's, supposedly, a fair 1st level "final fight", being only a couple levels above 1st. In practice, he will one-shot almost any 1st level char, and most 2nd level non-fighters, making it a badly balanced monster.So, there's a matter of tastes here. A narrativist guy, would want his ogre to match the story. A gamist guy, would want the ogre to be a "fair, balanced encounter". And a simulationist guy, would want the ogre to follow the "game physics". You happen to be in the third trope, while others are in the first, and others in the second one.</blockquote>

Verification