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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5878901" data-attributes="member: 6668292">That's not what I proposed. The hydra would make only one attack at +8, and deal more damage (based on the number of heads left). The crossbowmen would make each attack separately, though would likely deal less damage (1d6+3 compared to 1d10+4[+1/extra head]).Respectfully, no, it doesn't. I play a level-based game (1-20). I play a game where twelve level 3 crossbowmen are dangerous to most level 15 characters. I play a game where you advance and grow after every session, not after every level (usually 4-5 sessions, for my group).This isn't necessarily logically true. I've explained my view on this to you already (damage reduction on the dragon, for example).That's not what I'm asking D&D to be in its base or assumed form, so no problems there.Awesome for base D&D. Cool for some of my games. Awesome for all of your games. But why would this completely optional change my group could use be so objectionable to you? I don't want it as core. I want it to be optional. You don't think the game "should" be that way, and that's cool. It won't be for your group. For people that do houserule falling damage and falling into lava and have conceptual problems with groups of crossbowmen being blown off because of the influence of certain modern fantasy, we get a module that we'll enjoy. Win/win.No, I'm not. Please, don't put words in my mouth. I'm very clearly telling you what I want. I know, because the system I play right now gives me this style of game. It has levels (1-20). It has dragons. It has crossbowmen. Both are usually dangerous at later levels. While I like the feel of E6, it is by no means what I'm asking for. Trust me. As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Edit: [MENTION=27160]Balesir[/MENTION], In your experience comment, you said "Alas, it seems that logic will not assuage a romantic heart." Out of curiosity, what am I logically missing? I'm curious, because I find you to be a very logical poster, and since I don't feel like I'm missing something, I'd like clarification. Thank you for the "romantic heart" comment, though. I do find it quite a compliment. Sincerely. As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification