Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ClaytonCross" data-source="post: 8086125" data-attributes="member: 6880599">You should re-read rules 1-3 again, by what you wrote you didn't graps what I wrote at all. #1 is ignore as needed these are guidelines not laws. #2 is basically don't us nothing but 5ft melee all the times and uses 16 other options and suggestion of mixing them for variety. Going form using 1 type of unit to 17 is not a restriction its a new world of options. #3 is to avoid the single&nbsp; 5ft melee&quot;HP bag&quot; bosses. That solves some complaints players have and again opens up a world of options. These are not one formula suggestions, they aren't even complete encounters and incredibly vague. How your taking something so huge and calling it a tiny box doesn't even make since.You just announced that you missed the entire point of the thread and just about every post in it..... (0.0) ... what did you read?The entire thread is about adding variation to tatical encoutners to make them more interesting to run for GM who are bored of tactical encounters. (This also benifits players but that is actually a naturally resulting side benefit.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ClaytonCross, post: 8086125, member: 6880599"] You should re-read rules 1-3 again, by what you wrote you didn't graps what I wrote at all. #1 is ignore as needed these are guidelines not laws. #2 is basically don't us nothing but 5ft melee all the times and uses 16 other options and suggestion of mixing them for variety. Going form using 1 type of unit to 17 is not a restriction its a new world of options. #3 is to avoid the single 5ft melee"HP bag" bosses. That solves some complaints players have and again opens up a world of options. These are not one formula suggestions, they aren't even complete encounters and incredibly vague. How your taking something so huge and calling it a tiny box doesn't even make since. You just announced that you missed the entire point of the thread and just about every post in it..... (0.0) ... what did you read? The entire thread is about adding variation to tatical encoutners to make them more interesting to run for GM who are bored of tactical encounters. (This also benifits players but that is actually a naturally resulting side benefit.) [/QUOTE]

Verification