Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MostlyDm" data-source="post: 6987202" data-attributes="member: 6788973">It's a fascinating idea, as usual.A few minor thoughts.&nbsp; Your current metric assumes as an outcome &quot;50% of at least one survivor.&quot;&nbsp; If that's the outcome assumption you stick with, you should put that in huge bold letters. I suspect that this outcome is significantly more extreme, and assumes a much harder base game, than most people will be expecting.&nbsp; Remember, the supposed definition of DMG &quot;Deadly&quot; is that there's a chance of some player death.&nbsp;&nbsp; I'm not specifically complaining or anything, just observing that your play assumptions may diverge significantly from the people that want to use your tool.Which kind of segues into my next comment.&nbsp; I think you'll need to very explicitly communicate exactly what assumptions your simulations make about party tactics.&nbsp; For example, you say &quot;four 15th level Champions played straightforwardly&quot; ... but what does that mean, exactly?&nbsp; Does it mean that they engage in a mix of melee and ranged and make regular attacks?&nbsp; Does it assume they grapple, shove, and gang-smash enemies?&nbsp; Do they use Dodge?My first assumption for the word &quot;straightforwardly&quot; would be that they make nothing but regular attack rolls, but you often describe other tactical approaches with such an offhanded/casual tone that I sometimes wonder if you assume nearly every table is using similar tactics.&nbsp; So, again, something that probably needs to be more fully spelled out.Just in case there's any confusion, none of this is meant as a slight.&nbsp; I have massive respect and admiration for you, and I think this is an awesome endeavor you are pursuing.&nbsp; I wish you nothing but success.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MostlyDm, post: 6987202, member: 6788973"] It's a fascinating idea, as usual. A few minor thoughts. Your current metric assumes as an outcome "50% of at least one survivor." If that's the outcome assumption you stick with, you should put that in huge bold letters. I suspect that this outcome is significantly more extreme, and assumes a much harder base game, than most people will be expecting. Remember, the supposed definition of DMG "Deadly" is that there's a chance of [I]some[/I] player death. I'm not specifically complaining or anything, just observing that your play assumptions may diverge significantly from the people that want to use your tool. Which kind of segues into my next comment. I think you'll need to very explicitly communicate exactly what assumptions your simulations make about party tactics. For example, you say "four 15th level Champions played straightforwardly" ... but what does that mean, exactly? Does it mean that they engage in a mix of melee and ranged and make regular attacks? Does it assume they grapple, shove, and gang-smash enemies? Do they use Dodge? My first assumption for the word "straightforwardly" would be that they make nothing but regular attack rolls, but you often describe other tactical approaches with such an offhanded/casual tone that I sometimes wonder if you assume nearly every table is using similar tactics. So, again, something that probably needs to be more fully spelled out. Just in case there's any confusion, none of this is meant as a slight. I have massive respect and admiration for you, and I think this is an awesome endeavor you are pursuing. I wish you nothing but success. [/QUOTE]

Verification