NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8125411" data-attributes="member: 6790260">4e did a pretty good job as far as balance goes. Nothing is perfect, to be sure, but it did a pretty good job. 13th Age is another example that does a pretty good job. (I'd also say Dungeon World is pretty good, but that's a more complex question since "using the rules as written" and "extending the rules" is almost synonymous.)Likewise, 4e's encounter building math actually works. There are, as always, some edge cases (like Needlefang Drake Swarms or high-level monsters with nasty condition effects de-levelled down to level 1), but by and large 4e's XP budget does what it claims to do and gives a statistically reliable estimate of difficulty. Statistical reliability means that, a small portion of the time, it WON'T work as intended--you CAN be surprised. But surprises will be just that, surprising.As for your talk about this hyper-mechanical adventure, I see this as a defense of my argument, not an attack on it. The classes as currently designed in 5e could only all get to do what the game promises--everyone gets to contribute in roughly equal amount and intensity to overall success--if you design the adventure badly. That's not a sign that "everyone gets to contribute roughly equally" is a bad goal, it's a sign that the system is fighting your efforts to reach it. A well-designed system wouldn't need any weird efforts to cater to every possible pattern of player option choices. Simply offering diverse challenges would be enough, because whatever the players happen to choose for class or race or whatever, there would be an approach that does interesting things in the process of addressing those challenges.</blockquote>

Verification