CRs/ELs -- apparently the designers don't read the rules they talk about (old thread)

[jdrakeh]

But I think that some of the "complaints" about 3.X are a little disingenuous.

Here, here. I think that this is especially true of the complaints about CR. Namely, there are quite a few people who deliberately misrepresent a CR-balanced encounter as being one that PCs are guaranteed to win. Likewise, there are a not small number of people who complain that D&D 3x lacks rules for sending creatures (or groups of creatures) with a CR/EL higher than the average party level against the PCs. Neither of these claims is true, at all.

 

[cougent]

I have found I almost cannot read the blogs or other personal reports of the designers and testers because I keep thinking to myself after reading about all their issues "This is the lamest group of DM's and players I have ever seen." Not saying anything about 4E here, just about the ability of these guys to role play, or rather lack thereof.

 

[Beginning of the End]

The way that the CR/EL system looks on first sight is as he describes it. And it also is very, very wonky once you start adding multiple opponents (more than 4) to an encounter.

Maybe for illiterates.

The rest of us read the DMG, in which the second paragraph in the section on "Challenge Ratings and Encounter Levels" talked about parties with more than four members in them. We also noticed the large and conspicuous "Table 4-2: Encounter Difficulty", which clearly laid out the fact that a 1st level party would be facing more than just EL 1 challenges.

We might have also taken the time to read the very large sidebar directly underneath "Table 4-1: Encounter Numbers" called "What's Challenging?" that, again, specifically discussed how the CR/EL system worked and how it should be used.

This all would have, admittedly, required us to actually read the rules before assuming we knew how they worked. If they've somehow managed to eradicate this step in 4th Edition, I will be heartily surprised.

 

[Maggan]

Maybe for illiterates.

I'll take a wild stab in the dark here and propose the theory that MerricB is actually literate.

/M

 

[wedgeski]

I have found I almost cannot read the blogs or other personal reports of the designers and testers because I keep thinking to myself after reading about all their issues "This is the lamest group of DM's and players I have ever seen." Not saying anything about 4E here, just about the ability of these guys to role play, or rather lack thereof.

These guys aren't playtesting their ability to roleplay, they're playtesting the *rules*.

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

the article

Yeah, I agree that the article as written is pretty weak. And like others here, I'm tired of the 3E bashing... some of it borders on disrespect to the 3E designers, who in my opinion are giants compared to some of the current crowd.

That said, I agree with one point, that the 3E paradigm that 50% of encounters should be of a CR equal to the party's level is boring. I would like to see the game evolve in a way that moves towards battles having higher numbers of opponents, and it seems like 4E is trying to head in that direction.

Ken

 

[Raven Crowking]

Yeah, that bothered me as well. Doesn't inspire much confidence in their game design credentials, either.

Yet, every time I point out a potential problem with what the designers are saying about 4e, I hear "They're the designers; they obviously know this stuff better than we do"!

 

[Janx]

Yet, every time I point out a potential problem with what the designers are saying about 4e, I hear "They're the designers; they obviously know this stuff better than we do"!

I work as a software developer. One thing I notice is that there are those who can write software, and those who can program. The difference? Anybody can learn a programming language, and write a program. But fewer can actually design and write software that fully solves the problem.

My point, is after 20 years experience, you can't teach problem solving and design skill. It takes a certain brain. Just because somebody has a title "designer" doesn't mean they're actually good at it. Your best bet is look at their body of work, and decide if it hit the mark for the customers they designed for.

When you also factor in that only recently has "game design" been available as college course curiculum, why would you assume a "game designer" knows anymore than you. They're all self taught/mentored.

On the other hand, I do not presume that everybody is capable of designing a good game. Far from it. But I also do not advocate assuming that everybody on a design team is good at design.

Janx

 

[Raven Crowking]

Janx, I could not agree with you more.

 

[hexgrid]

I'll take a wild stab in the dark here and propose the theory that MerricB is actually literate.

And I'm going to take an even wilder stab and say that Mike Mearls has read, and does in fact understand, 3e rules.