NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5984212" data-attributes="member: 42582">I think for those poster, there is a big difference between designing an RPG and playing one. And for what it's worth, I agree with them.I think it also depends a bit on what the game mechanics are meant to do. If they meant to provide a process simulation, then I guess that anyone might have a better view of how that simulation should be implemented. But if the mechanics are meant (for example) to distribute spotlight time among the participants, and have been designed to do this via careful reference to the abilities that participants get via the PC-build rules, then I would think you might want to play as written for a bit before toying with them.And sometimes you can see where a designer assumption doesn't work out. In 4e, for example, clerics' turn undead ability got a bigger AoE at higher levels. The design intention was that combats at higher levels would be more epic and happen on larger spaces. Play experience over time showed that this wasn't happening (as one designer put it, "People's living room tables don't get any bigger as the PCs level") and so it turned out that Turn Undead at high levels was over-powered. It ended up getting errata-ed, but would have been obvious house rule bait prior to this.But changing that part of the game - one parameter of one effect where the rationale behind the design, and the flaw, are obvious - is very different from (say) tweaking with the action economy, or the basic logic of class builds.</blockquote>

Verification