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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Axiomatic Unicorn" data-source="post: 80359" data-attributes="member: 1974">No problem.  Clear intent may can be hard to express on a board at times.  Now back to the issue.AGAIN, no.  I do not want a perfect system , I simply don't want them to present a system that does not work.  The existing system claims to provide a formula for adding HD and/or levels.  It does not provide valueable results.  Often the starting CRs are just plain way off.  The entire concpet of a base CR for a monster requires that you assume the party is balanced and has 4 characters.  Restraining the game this way is a detraction.The skill system is total apples and oranges.  Do you really think that just because they both use the word "circumstance"  that they can be compared?  Because they have nothing else in common.  Many examples of total screwed up CRs have been presented in this thread.  Ashockney commented on one narrow one and basically blew it off, then blamed the rest on 3rd parties.  Ignoring many other concerns.  Can you name for me an example where the circumstance modifiers in skill checks makes the system not work right?  I can not.Skills work / CRs don't.  How is the use of the word "circumstance" in both systems in any way relevant?Infers?   I think you need a dictionary.  I have explained this at least twice in this thread.  I have clearly stated that the disposal nature of the CR system is its redeeming factor.  The 3E/D20 system works fine without it.  To be clear, I DO think the CR system "is so utterly worthless that a DM is best served to find some other means of guaging challenges and awarding XP."  But that is in no way tied to my use of the word disposable.As to your use of the CR system, I obviously can not directly comment on it.  Your statement may as well be that you walk in the rain all the time and never get wet.  On the one hand you just may not be mentioning that you use an umbrella, which for the CR system would be only using simple monsters and fairly basic encounters.  On the other hand you may be oblivious of how wet you are, which for the CR system would mean you are using the exp points the system states and often giving players high experience for easy challenges or low experience for hard challenges.  The remaining possibility is that you are making adjustments to the experience provided on a very frequent basis.  If this is the case, you are really using the CR system yourself.You can say you are not wet, but I can still see the rain.????I made a casual comment in a previous thread that I think the CR system does not work.  I got attacked for daring to make that claim.  I joked about it in this thread and got attacked again.  It is worth noting that in neither thread has anyone made any significant effort to show that the system DOES work.  In general, they just claim, in vague terms, that it works for them and attack me for being critical.You make it sound like I jumped in here calling everyone idiots and screaming for the head of Monte Cook.  I did no such thing.As you said, a perfect system is impossible, so I don't see why I should be required to post one, just to gain the privlige of being critical.  I would be happy to be part of that debate, but the people who are content with the existing system are to busy bashing my comments.I did present a greatly simplified version above, what is wrong with that?I totally agree with you.  Especially regarding dragons.  Yes dragons should often be the "boss"  encounter in an adventure.  So why make the CR low, providing an unfairly low amount of experience????  Or some newbie DM intentionally chooses a high CR for the final battle monster, not realizing that the Dragon CRs have that built in, so the party gets slaughtered.I will give 1e a pass because the entire concept was so much different back then.The concept of providing exp based on the actual challenge is certainly a great advance.  I have not criticized that.  The CR system that is supposed to measure the degree of challenge is a failure.  At least for anything beyond the most basic of encounters.</blockquote>

Verification