Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="eamon" data-source="post: 5020343" data-attributes="member: 51942">Well, in theory perhaps.&nbsp; In practice, because FRW defenses tend to so commonly be terribly anyhow, I don't find this to be a particularly realistic trade-off. Any FRW targetting monster can generally already choose from several party members it'll trivially hit, and even &quot;high&quot; defenses tend to be fairly poor (certainly generally more that 2 below AC).So, if a DM really hit PC's as hard in the NADs as in AC, FRW targeting monsters would be a TPK recipe.&nbsp; Because it is fully expected that FRW are hit so very commonly, a DM designer can't really use it as a balancing factor because of the heavy collateral damage.&nbsp; Basically, if monster group is balanced to be challenging on the assumption that they hit 50-60% of the time vs. FRW, then even very optimized groups will succumb if they just happen to have the wrong mix of defenses (or if the monsters have a choice of FRW attacking powers).&nbsp; So, generally, encounters need to be balanced under the assumption that they hit even more frequently.It's a downside, but it's not nearly as serious a downside as the numbers at first glance suggest.&nbsp; It's nice to have high defenses of course, but even a character that had 3 terrible defenses would remain playable as is.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="eamon, post: 5020343, member: 51942"] Well, in theory perhaps. In practice, because FRW defenses tend to so commonly be terribly anyhow, I don't find this to be a particularly realistic trade-off. Any FRW targetting monster can generally already choose from several party members it'll trivially hit, and even "high" defenses [I]tend [/I]to be fairly poor (certainly generally more that 2 below AC). So, if a DM really hit PC's as hard in the NADs as in AC, FRW targeting monsters would be a TPK recipe. Because it is fully expected that FRW are hit so very commonly, a DM designer can't really use it as a balancing factor because of the heavy collateral damage. Basically, if monster group is balanced to be challenging on the assumption that they hit 50-60% of the time vs. FRW, then even very optimized groups will succumb if they just happen to have the wrong mix of defenses (or if the monsters have a choice of FRW attacking powers). So, generally, encounters need to be balanced under the assumption that they hit even more frequently. It's a downside, but it's not nearly as serious a downside as the numbers at first glance suggest. It's nice to have high defenses of course, but even a character that had 3 terrible defenses would remain playable as is. [/QUOTE]

Verification