Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ZombieRoboNinja" data-source="post: 3929501" data-attributes="member: 54843">1) Not in 4e! Per-encounter abilities mean that a standard &quot;encounter&quot; is closer to equal, because saving up resources across multiple encounters isn't nearly as important. (And if you look at the playtests, they all seem like pretty tough encounters, even at level 1.)2) Not if they're following the rules.3) Depends on the DM, of course, but I don't think you can say this is a huge factor. I know many DMs who don't pull punches.I'd suggest another point:4) The PCs form an &quot;adventuring party.&quot; This grouping is actually a pretty important advantage, particularly at higher levels. f you pay attention to the economics of adventuring, a PC group probably has the annual income of a small nation, and they reinvest almost all of it into getting better magical equipment - and in the world(s) of D&amp;D, money can buy you a LOT of protection. So those level 1 NPCs are probably not too much worse off than level 1 PCs. But whereas they're stuck on a 1g/month salary, PCs are raking in the magical equipment. And as many people have mentioned somewhat disparagingly, an ideal adventuring party is basically set up like a Special Ops team, with dedicated professionals filling specific roles to optimize their chances of operational success. Those human soldiers are probably 90% fighters, with&nbsp; some rangers and rogues (scouts), possibly a warlord in command, and maybe a cleric or wizard for support, because even in a &quot;high-magic&quot; setting it's easier to pick up a stick and practice combat than it is to master even the basics of magic, unless you're wealthy enough to afford special training. Whereas a good adventuring party has just enough meat-shields for optimal killing efficiency.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ZombieRoboNinja, post: 3929501, member: 54843"] 1) Not in 4e! Per-encounter abilities mean that a standard "encounter" is closer to equal, because saving up resources across multiple encounters isn't nearly as important. (And if you look at the playtests, they all seem like pretty tough encounters, even at level 1.) 2) Not if they're following the rules. 3) Depends on the DM, of course, but I don't think you can say this is a huge factor. I know many DMs who don't pull punches. I'd suggest another point: 4) The PCs form an "adventuring party." This grouping is actually a pretty important advantage, particularly at higher levels. f you pay attention to the economics of adventuring, a PC group probably has the annual income of a small nation, and they reinvest almost all of it into getting better magical equipment - and in the world(s) of D&D, money can buy you a LOT of protection. So those level 1 NPCs are probably not too much worse off than level 1 PCs. But whereas they're stuck on a 1g/month salary, PCs are raking in the magical equipment. And as many people have mentioned somewhat disparagingly, an ideal adventuring party is basically set up like a Special Ops team, with dedicated professionals filling specific roles to optimize their chances of operational success. Those human soldiers are probably 90% fighters, with some rangers and rogues (scouts), possibly a warlord in command, and maybe a cleric or wizard for support, because even in a "high-magic" setting it's easier to pick up a stick and practice combat than it is to master even the basics of magic, unless you're wealthy enough to afford special training. Whereas a good adventuring party has just enough meat-shields for optimal killing efficiency. [/QUOTE]

Verification