Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 4809171" data-attributes="member: 2011">Who said that?In which thread and post?Just because this change, regardless of whether it comes from a feat or from a house rule, fixes part of the math issues does not mean that it is required.It means that many players and evidently WotC recognized a gaming mechanical need for their games.If you do not recognize that need, no worries. Your similar encounters will be slightly more grindy at higher levels and slightly more prone to TPKs than people who do recognize it, but that's ok. It's your game and your players.Have fun with that.But, if your purpose here is to argue that it is not needed for anyone else's game, there are many people who see you as mistaken. Your own n+4 Paragon level encounter illustrated that to some extent (in all fairness, you did pick the epitome DND monster that has a plethora of abilities that synergize well with each other for a solo, in other words, you picked poorly to illustrate your point).Just because you do not see it as needed for your game (or see it as needed only if the player decides to take the feat) does not mean that others do not see it as needed for theirs. So, arguing that it is not needed for theirs is the same, but opposite, argument that you are claiming that they are making, that it is needed for your game.Kind of pointless, eh?Each group will have to determine whether they want or need the fix on their own, regardless of how they decide to implement it if they do take it.</blockquote>

Verification