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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 6866073" data-attributes="member: 5834">That's likely because we're having two different discussions. I'm mentioning this campaign because it is the current one I am running. I've discussed these same problems when I was running a point buy campaign and seen the same arguments. The only new one was the "6 to 8 encounter day" solves everything argument. I've been in this dog and pony show too many times. I respond mostly out of a sense of courtesy to respond to someone that has taken the time respond to a post of mine. Most of the responses tend to be wrong assumptions that I'm growing extremely tired of answering.I would rather say that you can make the overall math work. I wouldn't say it works very well at a baseline level. There are lots of ways to boost your abilities far beyond what monsters can handle like the easy access to a 26 AC enough times per day to make many fights trivial is an easy possibility in any game that I'm surprised more people haven't experienced. 28 very easily is very possible as well. This is using point buy, no feats, and only multiclassing. I noticed a few people banned multiclassing, which was probably wise for game balance.Treasure does. I'm working on how to take that into account in this campaign. We didn't hand out near this much treasure in any previous campaign. Items were very limited. This campaign is a bad example to use, though I will state that a two or three times deadly encounter seems like it should be harder.It isn't. I control the power scale according to the circumstances. Two campaigns point buy by the book. Two campaigns 33 point buy with only one 8 stat allowed to smooth the stat dumping. This has been the most generous campaign yet because I wanted to make fighting the Lords of the Abyss something special.That may be true. I've done some other modifications that may work.Not much to disagree with. It's been like this in every edition of D&D I've ever played. The reason I learn these math problems is due to min-max players. They really show you how to leverage game mechanics against the environment. This helps me find problems with the game math, so I can fix them either with a house rule or on the back end with encounter and monster design.I just don't think the 6 to 8 encounter day is a panacea to the game math problems. The idea that it was I felt required a challenge. There is no easy fix for the problems in 5E anymore than there was an easy fix in any edition of D&D. You have to take the time learn what abilities cause problems, then test things to see how to get the feel you want. That's all folks like CapnZapp, Hemlock,Zardnaar, and myself are doing. We found some problems with the math of the game that players can leverage to make the game too easy and we're figuring out how to make changes that work to make the game as challenging as we want it to be.It seems every time these discussions get started, someone wants to challenge that idea like the game system is perfect. It isn't. Never has and never will be a perfect edition of D&D. And encounter building has always been a work in progress in every edition. It takes time to figure out what works and what doesn't. These little tables rarely work. I liked the idea of challenging Flamestrike's belief the table works fine. I don't think it does. I don't think those tables ever do, at least not against experienced players. Better to do experimentation on your own until you figure out what will work and what won't than use those little tables in my opinion. Better to understand how the game rules interact than rely too much on CR assumptions to determine if a monster will be challenging. That's often been the point of these discussions from my perspective.</blockquote>

Verification