Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="swrushing" data-source="post: 2744072" data-attributes="member: 14140"></blockquote>please note the context. This was in response to why, because we will fudge, we dont go away and play some other game.both IMO are way off base. But there weill always be those who think changing one rule is a crime.lets examine this from a bigger scope. shall we. And BTW if the minmaxers would get the point you would revolutionize gaming.DND advises the Gm handing out appropriate challenges. That means you as Gm keep in mind your PC strength when you give them foes. The standard is a &quot;win with 255 loss of resource and little chance of death&quot; but the normal story arc list goes as far a the +4-5 or so where its a 50/50 chance of dying. They hand you CR BUT they also tell you to take into account your specific party traits and strengths and weaknesses and advise you in other places to use past encounters to modify this and that.In other words, if one group has well optimized characters with good effective gear and coordinated tactics they will/should get handed tougher adversaries and harder challenges than a less optimized group with haphazard gear and who have little interest and use in coordinated battle plans even though they have the same classes and levels..In short, the Gm will &quot;fudge&quot; the setup and the encounter, so to speak, from the get go, basing it on their abil;ity and performance. The reason is simple, to not do this results in one group being bored with cakewalk after cakewalk or the other group getting bored or worse with continual failures.So, YES, the question is &quot;why bother to optimize, since the challenge will be &quot;altered&quot; or &quot;scaled&quot; by the Gm to your current strength? This is true whether that &quot;scaling&quot; comes at the pre-scenario pick adversaries and circumstances stage or later during the play as he picks the &quot;are the orcs down the hall drunk&quot; or even if he waits until the dice roll goes wonky.One answer might well be that for some, optimizing isn't done to make his job in game easier, since he knows the Gm will provide him appropriately challenging sessions, but because to him optimizing is fun, like solving math puzzles.But, from the get go, whenever the Gms first figured out an ancient red dragon vs first level PCs was a no-no, your question was answered.Nope.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE="swrushing, post: 2744072, member: 14140"] [/QUOTE] please note the context. This was in response to why, because we will fudge, we dont go away and play some other game. both IMO are way off base. But there weill always be those who think changing one rule is a crime. lets examine this from a bigger scope. shall we. And BTW if the minmaxers would get the point you would revolutionize gaming. DND advises the Gm handing out appropriate challenges. That means you as Gm keep in mind your PC strength when you give them foes. The standard is a "win with 255 loss of resource and little chance of death" but the normal story arc list goes as far a the +4-5 or so where its a 50/50 chance of dying. They hand you CR BUT they also tell you to take into account your specific party traits and strengths and weaknesses and advise you in other places to use past encounters to modify this and that. In other words, if one group has well optimized characters with good effective gear and coordinated tactics they will/should get handed [b]tougher adversaries and harder challenges [/b] than a less optimized group with haphazard gear and who have little interest and use in coordinated battle plans even though they have the same classes and levels.. In short, the Gm will "fudge" the setup and the encounter, so to speak, from the get go, basing it on their abil;ity and performance. The reason is simple, to not do this results in one group being bored with cakewalk after cakewalk or the other group getting bored or worse with continual failures. So, YES, the question is "why bother to optimize, since the challenge will be "altered" or "scaled" by the Gm to your current strength? This is true whether that "scaling" comes at the pre-scenario pick adversaries and circumstances stage or later during the play as he picks the "are the orcs down the hall drunk" or even if he waits until the dice roll goes wonky. One answer might well be that for some, optimizing isn't done to make his job in game easier, since he knows the Gm will provide him appropriately challenging sessions, but because to him optimizing is fun, like solving math puzzles. But, from the get go, whenever the Gms first figured out an ancient red dragon vs first level PCs was a no-no, your question was answered. Nope. [/QUOTE]

Verification