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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 6866110" data-attributes="member: 6785785">I'm trying not to make assumptions, and to only address what you have actually said. I realize that there were two aspects to the discussions...one the party designed for he challenge and another you brought up in your current campaign. I don't assume all games you play are like that, and you said that was not the case, so I get it...but I don't think that mentioning that campaign was very useful to your argument. I don't know I I hold to the 6-8 encounter rule as solving everything, but having more encounters and having a party conditioned to think more encounters are likely before they can recover certainly mitigates many concerns about party power. Not all, you are correct. But it's one area, and kind of a foundation to start with.  Here's the thing....there are many many more ways to not get your AC to 26 or 28. Of all the combinations of classes, abilities, spells, and gear....most of them don't reach that level. The game as it's designed does not expect the party members to find only the most mathematically beneficial combinations and then crank out minmaxed PCs like an assembly line. So that's a big part of the problem. Your players are intentionally trying to make the math break down. They may not see it that way, but really, that's what they're doing. And in a lot of ways, that's fine. If that's what you guys enjoy, then more power to you. But the game does not expect that. The game assumes that for every optimizing power gamer, there's also a 10 year old girl playing with her uncle, and all she cares about is being an elven princess who ran away from her kingdom so she could be an adventurer. This player isn't worried about winning combat so much as she just wants to pretend for a bit. She's not concerned about maxing Dex and dumping Str, and making aure she takes sharpshooter instead of her first ASI because DUH everyone knows ranged is superior!!The game is designed with both of those players in mind. So if your players are all optimizers, then you have to adjust things. To me, this is a given...I would assume this to be the case, and wouldn't blame the game for it. And I think that's the basic argument.I think magical gear, despite being so limited in this edition both by the cap of +3 and with many items requiring attunement, ironically may have a bigger impact than ever. I've long been stingy with magical gear (to a fault, honestly), so that idea appeals to me in a way. But it also means every item you give them can have a huge impact on the game, especially if it's given at a level that's a bit lower than it should be given. I don't think there's any panacea. The game isn't perfect and won't be perfect even if adjustments are made. I myself don't stick to the tables at all. I think the 6-8 guideline is a decent tool to use, but I don't think it's the end all be all. But I don't think that [MENTION=6788736]Flamestrike[/MENTION] thought that either. He clearly had encounter design and environment and time constraints and all kinds of other tools in mind to help the multiple encounter day be challenging. I think he was right that it can be done, I just think that there was a fundamental difference about what "out of the box" meant. I don't really see either side as right or wrong...you and some of the other posters you mentioned who view the game through the lens of optimization all make plants of good points. As with most things, the answer is in the middle ground. But either way, good discussion.</blockquote>

Verification