Does the math need fixing in practice?...Forked Thread: Expertise justification?

[Nifft]

Isn't it simpler to just give a bonus to all attacks from PCs? Mathematically it's the same and you just have to adjust the values for the characters instead of all the monsters.

The difference here is one person adjusting numbers vs. four people adjusting numbers.

In 4e, monsters aren't all that complex. Adjusting the defenses of 20 monsters is quick & easy. However, PCs are complex. There are powers that give an explicit bonus to attacks (so "attack" isn't just one number); there are Implement vs. Weapon powers; there are racial powers; there are magic items, racial features, class features and feats that give situational bonuses to certain types of PC attack rolls.

Lots of variables go into a PC's attack bonus, and they can differ for different powers. That's a lot more difficult to validate than a monster's defenses (which are level +/- mumble mumble). There is a tool which helps players to do this validation, but it's closed and inflexible. I don't need a tool to help me calculate monster defenses, though: that's easy.

Basically, adjusting monsters is easy work which only one person has to get right; adjusting PC attacks is complicated work which many people have to all get right.

Why pick a hard way when the easy way is ... well ... easy?

Cheers, -- N

 

[Nikosandros]

The difference here is one person adjusting numbers vs. four people adjusting numbers.

In 4e, monsters aren't all that complex. Adjusting the defenses of 20 monsters is quick & easy. However, PCs are complex. There are powers that give an explicit bonus to attacks (so "attack" isn't just one number); there are Implement vs. Weapon powers; there are racial powers; there are magic items, racial features, class features and feats that give situational bonuses to certain types of PC attack rolls.

Lots of variables go into a PC's attack bonus, and they can differ for different powers. That's a lot more difficult to validate than a monster's defenses (which are level +/- mumble mumble). There is a tool which helps players to do this validation, but it's closed and inflexible. I don't need a tool to help me calculate monster defenses, though: that's easy.

Basically, adjusting monsters is easy work which only one person has to get right; adjusting PC attacks is complicated work which many people have to all get right.

Well, it's not really important since the result is the same, but I disagree about the complications... it's not hard at all. You adjust, once and for all, the attack values of the characters; it's not something that has to be done every time. On the other hand, as a DM, I have to remember to adjust every single monster that the party faces.

Why pick a hard way when the easy way is ... well ... easy?

Because I find my way much easier than yours... a perfectly valid reason, don't you think?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Question: reducing HP, EXP, and defenses... doesn´t it result in: just delevel the monster?
Or use lower level monsters instead?

I am convinced that monsters maybe get too tough, but maybe the easiest guideline would be: use lower level monsters when you level up and only use equal level monsters when you want a hard fight... maybe not intended by design, but maybe less problematic than it seems...

 

[Nifft]

Well, it's not really important since the result is the same, but I disagree about the complications... it's not hard at all. You adjust, once and for all, the attack values of the characters; it's not something that has to be done every time. On the other hand, as a DM, I have to remember to adjust every single monster that the party faces.

In my experience, characters change often. They get new magic items every session, and they get new feats & powers ever few sessions.

Characters can have different attack bonuses for different attacks, and you have to update EVERY power's attack bonus. That's a lot of numbers.

Monsters have three numbers each.

(Maybe it's because I organize my encounters beforehand, and do a bit of formatting on each monster entry to make it fit on the page with its encounter-mates. Maybe it's because I often tweak monster powers. I don't find that changing three numbers per monster type to be very hard at all. Of course, I don't run pre-made modules, so perhaps that's our difference.)

Because I find my way much easier than yours... a perfectly valid reason, don't you think?

Have you really tried both? (I have.)

Character Builder makes your way a pain in my experience. However, it certainly doesn't make my workload any higher if you choose your way!

Cheers, -- N

 

[Nifft]

Question: reducing HP, EXP, and defenses... doesn´t it result in: just delevel the monster?
Or use lower level monsters instead?

I am convinced that monsters maybe get too tough, but maybe the easiest guideline would be: use lower level monsters when you level up and only use equal level monsters when you want a hard fight... maybe not intended by design, but maybe less problematic than it seems...

Almost, but not quite, because damage and effects.

Damage per level isn't linear for non-minions -- there's a table. You get more (or better) dice as you go up. Effects aren't linear either (though there's no table just yet).

IMHO the damage and effects are pretty well done. Monsters can lay down enough hurt to keep fights interesting.

Now, effects are not nearly as rigid as they were in 3.5e, where you have to be conscious of PCs spell lists (what level is fly[/u], okay I can use that terrain; what level is plane shift, okay that foe isn't too unfair; etc.) -- 4e has more wiggle room in that regard, so maybe it would be okay to shift effects up one (or two or three) levels, but IMHO it's not a required consequence, and that makes it unnecessary.

Cheers, -- N