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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Zuranthium" data-source="post: 9418466" data-attributes="member: 7046627">LOL, that's not how math works. "10%" is not the same thing at all times.The difference between needing 19/20 and 17/20 to hit means you're doing TWICE as much damage over time with 17. It's NOT only 10% more damage, and this difference is extremely noticeable for a player. Saying "2 extra hits every 4-5 combats" (a misnomer to begin with) is not accurate representation.Similar for things like haste in a real-time game. If someone has "weapon delay decreased by 50%" (2 sec weapon delay --> 1 second) they are doing 100% more damage, not 50% more. If you have a "25% decrease" you're doing 33% more damage. A 67% gap, not just a 25% gap when going from "50%" to "25%".No. It. Wouldn't. Getting very tired of this fallacy. Especially when there's ways to decrease complexity while at the same time achieving some of the things I'm talking about, and when you raise no qualm about other complexities.Look at the weapon mastery change for 2024 D&D, adding new properties to each weapon in the game. Is that "too complex"? Is that going to push players away? According to everything else you've said, this is a problem...and yet you don't have a problem with it. Hypocritical.Why are you talking about nonlinear. No "mods" (damage, skill check) would be nonlinear. The one idea of carrying capacity being somewhat nonlinear is not a problem at all, it would follow a formula that is still very easy to understand and calculate:If your strength is 1-10, multiply by 10 to get your carrying capacity.If your strength is 11 or higher, multiply that number by itself to get your carrying capacity.</blockquote>

Verification