Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bolares" data-source="post: 8967828" data-attributes="member: 6790082">If a party goes trough the hurdle of optmizing their survival checks to "obscene levels" they are telling me a message. They want to be very good at that, at an obscene level, so I'd probably reward all the work they've put on to achieve that and make as so they will almost always win at that task without much difficulty, and then, in a moment I'd want them to be challenged in that task I'd probably create some curse or magical effect that changes that.What I don't like is a really early level of a class simply stating that you cannot get lost, that's just lazy/bad design. It trivializes a fun part of the game at no real cost to the player/party. I've run the exploration rules RAW and they functioned great, when there was no ranger in the party. So even if I agree the rules suck, by themselves they are still playable, the ranger (and the outlander background to an extend break them. So yes, I prefer to change the way a class works, rather than redesinging a whole system (even if it's a barebone one). And as I've said before, the change to the ranger was quick, easy and effective. Give the class expertise instead of saying can't or always. That way the players still feels like a badass explorer without making the game boring.But hey, if your way works for you great, you do you!</blockquote>