Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 9238447" data-attributes="member: 22779">I agree that it's not narrowly focused.&nbsp; Never argued that it wasn't.&nbsp; Heck, I don't think anyone is arguing that it's &quot;narrowly&quot; focused, although, I think it's perhaps not as broad as you are claiming.&nbsp; The fact that you have to add all sorts of house rules in order to achieve certain play, means that it's not as broadly focused as you are claiming.&nbsp; I mean, trying to do naval campaigns is a white whale in D&amp;D for me.&nbsp; I've been trying for editions to make it work.&nbsp; But, D&amp;D doesn't handle what I call platoon sized encounters-&nbsp; say 30 combatants to a side - very well at all.&nbsp; It's far too fiddly and granular.&nbsp; See the issues with summoning in 5e (and earlier editions) to see how much of a PITA adding 10-20 combatants to an encounter is.&nbsp; But, again, transparency is a different issue.&nbsp; There's so little in D&amp;D that is actually explained and it really should be.&nbsp; Why do we have bounded accuracy?&nbsp; What happens if you change bounded accuracy?&nbsp; And what little discussion about that that there is is almost entirely DM facing.&nbsp; There's very little telling the players, &quot;Hey, if you go out of your way to futz with bounded accuracy with your character, you are going to make the game less fun for everyone at the table.&nbsp; Please don't do that.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 9238447, member: 22779"] I agree that it's not narrowly focused. Never argued that it wasn't. Heck, I don't think anyone is arguing that it's "narrowly" focused, although, I think it's perhaps not as broad as you are claiming. The fact that you have to add all sorts of house rules in order to achieve certain play, means that it's not as broadly focused as you are claiming. I mean, trying to do naval campaigns is a white whale in D&D for me. I've been trying for editions to make it work. But, D&D doesn't handle what I call platoon sized encounters- say 30 combatants to a side - very well at all. It's far too fiddly and granular. See the issues with summoning in 5e (and earlier editions) to see how much of a PITA adding 10-20 combatants to an encounter is. But, again, transparency is a different issue. There's so little in D&D that is actually explained and it really should be. Why do we have bounded accuracy? What happens if you change bounded accuracy? And what little discussion about that that there is is almost entirely DM facing. There's very little telling the players, "Hey, if you go out of your way to futz with bounded accuracy with your character, you are going to make the game less fun for everyone at the table. Please don't do that." [/QUOTE]

Verification