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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5877771" data-attributes="member: 82106">Well, in all fairness you COULD create a system where both things are possible, but it wouldn't resemble any edition of D&D very much. You can look to mythological sources for examples of how that would work. Every monster would have an 'achilles heel' or there would be ways to come up with countermagics or whatever that with preparation would defeat the dragon in some sense (Ged learns the true name of Orm Umbar and 'wins' his confrontation against it for instance). Of course it is tough to make a good game that works that way. The other option is a system that is just incredibly swingy. 12 crossbowmen, due to their numbers, have the force of probability on their side. One of those bolts is going to prove lethal to our hero. OTOH he can equally get lucky and defeat the dragon in similar fashion. Yes, that does mean the 12 crossbowmen can beat the dragon too, but only in theory. They won't risk it, and if they do they lack the means to get near the dragon lair without being ambushed or whatever.So, basically I agree with your central premise, you can't make a system that has the sensibilities and play style of D&D where a bunch of low level mooks can threaten a high level PC. I wonder how this issue is going to manifest in 5e? It sort of seems like their going to run into it with their "everything remains relevant" approach. Will the game be super swingy, or will it rely heavily on PCs needing to find that one specific way to defeat the big bad monster? I'm not sure how either is going to happen and retain D&D feel...</blockquote>

Verification