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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 7931581" data-attributes="member: 6801228">I'm still not impressed with your run-on sentences. Seriously, that first paragraph is a single sentence. It makes it incredibly hard to read and understand you.I don't care about ethereal creatures. Goblins aren't ethereal creatures. Never have been in any edition of the game.Neither are most demons, devils, golems, dragons, in fact most creatures in the game are not ethereal. So, yes, a 30 AC does not mean you have a 30 touch AC unless you have special abilities that mean you do. But that has nothing to do with the point I was making.In older editions, 3.5 in particular, a goblin and other low CR creatures stopped being threats. They could not even hit a party that was following along the average curve. It was a waste of time to even put them on the battlefield, no matter how many there were.In 5e, a goblin or other low CR creature is still a threat. They can still hit you, they can still deal damage to you, and if you put enough of them on the field, they can most likely take out even high level characters. In fact, it doesn't even take that many of them and, I would argue for Goblins in particular, they are more dangerous in 5e than they have been in any edition before this.So, if weak monsters are more threatening than ever, especially to high level parties, than is that not evidence that there is something off with saying that the monsters are universally less threatening than they used to be? Is not the fact that there is a discussion of "Peasants with Bows" taking out dragons being a problem in this edition a good sign that not everything is gonzo mythic action time?And, I don't have memory problems. You keep bringing up the same points over and over again, so I will have to address them over and over again. If you don't want to bring up points already discussed, stop bringing them back up. You've thrown the "fireball was designed to be unbalanced" factoid out so many times I knew that was what you were posting a link to before I even bothered to hover over it and check.Yes, long term mutilating effects are less present in 5e than they were in 3.5. We've discussed them. I'm glad about it.You think it is impossible to threaten PCs with dangerous fights without using large numbers of monsters. Myself and other posters have shown that isn't true either.You think it is impossible to have enough enemies to threaten the PCs without breaking the reality of the gameworld with the sheer number of bodies necessary. I've discussed why that isn't true repeatedly and you just declare that I prove your point and move on.Yet, you keep bringing up all of these points and declaring yourself completely right and that it all proves 5e is the least challenging edition ever designed.</blockquote>

Verification