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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8279534" data-attributes="member: 16814">So, there's two cases here.  In one, you've made combat more dangerous, in the other, you made combat nearly impossible to survive.  Let's look at these.In the first case, this doesn't decenter combat, it changes how players engage combat.  Combat is still strongly incentivized, because without it I don't get loot as easily, I have to rely on GM whim for XP, and I'm not using the one part of the rules that it player facing and leverageable.  So, now, it's more dangerous, but I still want combat as a player -- it's where my rewards are.  So, I'm going to focus on nova combat abilities to do damage as quickly as possible.  I'm looking at good scouting/warning abilities, so I can set up combat on my terms.  I'm looking to create synergies with my party, so we nova more effectively.  And, I'm looking to have abilities to let me control my rest/recharge cycle -- spells like Leomund's Tiny Hut become important, as well as high efficiency between combat healing.  These are now incentivized due to this change -- combat is decentered.Now, I already know you've addressed the XP trigger -- you've chosen to move that to the GM decides column, meaning PCs don't earn XP for combat, but this is a different change, necessary to address a different incentive.  You also have a rather uncommon situation where everyone plays non-casters, which I find really odd and still halfway suspect that there's something you've done to make casting punitive in some way.  This cuts in an interesting way as it means more problem solution is mundane and like to violence but also that the PCs can't leverage the spell system to effectively increase nova capabilities.  Not sure how that plays out.  I'll hazard a guess that, given how extensively you've already modified the base game, you have also nerfed a number of those spells like Leomund's Hut.  However, all of this is really playing whack a mole -- it doesn't deincentivize combat so much as remove the tools to do it well.For the second, this isn't quite de-incentivizing combat, it's straight out negating the combat system by overtuning.  You've essentially removed the single largest portion of the game by saying, "sure, you can try to use those rules, but you'll just lose and die."  That's a disincentive, sure, but it doesn't leave much of 5e intact afterword.  Most of the class abilities are pointless, the majority of the rules are pointless, etc.  It's not a careful retuning into a new shape, it's an old style lobotomy with a sharp spike and a hammer.</blockquote>

Verification