Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FormerlyHemlock" data-source="post: 6717767" data-attributes="member: 6787650"><p>If you change the phrase &quot;especially if&quot; to &quot;provided that&quot;, your statement will be correct. But as written, the bolded statement actually a non sequitur. 5E is officially supports any number of combats per day, even per DMG guidelines, but I think you're correct that the game is balanced around lots of little fights. That doesn't mean 1-3 combats per day will be easier than expected; what it means is that long-rest PCs will be proportionately overpowered relative to other PCs. &quot;One big fight&quot; will mean that warlocks look weaker than wizards, and fighters look weaker than paladins. It doesn't say anything about whether the fights themselves will be hard or easy, it says something about which character classes are best suited for that type of campaign. A party of warlocks would obviously find one big fight harder than lots of little fights, not easier.</p></blockquote><p></p>

[QUOTE="FormerlyHemlock, post: 6717767, member: 6787650"] If you change the phrase "especially if" to "provided that", your statement will be correct. But as written, the bolded statement actually a non sequitur. 5E is officially supports any number of combats per day, even per DMG guidelines, but I think you're correct that the game is balanced around lots of little fights. That doesn't mean 1-3 combats per day will be easier than expected; what it means is that long-rest PCs will be proportionately overpowered relative to other PCs. "One big fight" will mean that warlocks look weaker than wizards, and fighters look weaker than paladins. It doesn't say anything about whether the fights themselves will be hard or easy, it says something about which character classes are best suited for that type of campaign. A party of warlocks would obviously find one big fight harder than lots of little fights, not easier. [/QUOTE]

Verification