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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 7545511" data-attributes="member: 71699">I'm drawn toward an ensemble of fixed standards, based on pillar builds representing the main strategies, times tiers.The reason is that some strategies offer advantages that are balanced by reduced damage. A single fixed standard might make a build look weak, whereas against other builds offering those advantages it is strong. Additionally, some strategies change in relative strength depending on tier. A single fixed standard could suffer the same issues as "the sky" in such respects.A starting point then might be to agree the main strategies. I think some of those are -Melee one-target* weapon attack, no shield e.g. Reckless+GWMRanged one-target attack, e.g. Precision+SSMelee high-AC, e.g. Trip+Shield+Defense or Shield(spell)+Shield+DefenseRanged cantrip spam, e.g. Agonizing + Eldritch Blast (+Repelling?)Offensive buff, e.g. Twinned+Haste or Twinned+Greater Invis.Unarmed e.g. Mobile+Shadow Arts or <missing feat>+Open HandDual-Wield melee one-target weapon attack e.g. Dual Wielder+TWF+Rapiers (IKR)*at a timeOnce the main strategies were agreed on, a next step could be to agree parameters for various up-times, i.e. how many rounds to average over, how many encounters to spread resources across, number and HP of foes for strategies like cleave and horde breaker. An ensemble like that casts a lot of light, revealing gaps in the design space that players might like to explore, and places where the designer balance estimates have gone over or under. It could require formation of a work group who might argue out the terms, before getting down to creating the estimates.</blockquote>

Verification