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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kerrick" data-source="post: 4192378" data-attributes="member: 4722">I was trying to track closer to UK's formula, which worked for everything but dragons.I'll reserve judgment until I've seen the books.Well yeah.. nothing's perfect - that goes without saying.Pfft. The designers are touting the "new" tactical aspects of the game like they invented them, but all they're doing is making mechanics that bring them into the light more and encourage players to use them more often. You can do the same thing right now, and you could do it in 2E and 1E too - it's just that the rules to handle it have gotten more concrete through time.Probably. See, the problem here is that you're working with the existing flaws of the system, which start at low levels and extend into high levels - all you're doing is fixing the high-level flaws, which isn't enough.Bah, it'll still be closer to 3.5 than 4E is - it will actually be backwards compatible. I won't ever claim it's still 3.5; I'm aiming for something closer to 3.6 or 3.7.Because a creature at the high end of the spread, while the same CR on paper, could actually be much higher in actuality? I'm not too worried about anything beyond L40-50, really; I mean, I'm scaling stuff so that it can work beyond that point, but I won't lay bets on it. I've got zero experience playing ultra-high-level D&D (the highest I've gone was 30ish), so I honestly don't know what effect the changes I'm making will have. I think at some point the power level would just get really silly, no matter how well the system is designed, and things would cease to work in any meaningful manner. If I can make it work at the levels where the vast majority plays, I'll be happy.</blockquote>

Verification