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="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 6095677" data-attributes="member: 54877">"Bounded accuracy" covers for a lot of other design mistakes, at least if done reasonably well.  That is, you can handle the "sweet spot" in D&D via the 4E route of having the numbers scale within a framework that keeps them in proportion--or you can say, "toss the scaling, the important thing is to have the sweet spot be there all the time--so use something like the early D&D 5th to 9th level numbers or close to them."  The hard part has always been how you flavor and manage the exceptions--such as 1st level wimps (as desired by some) or powerful high level-wizards (as desired by some).   You could somewhat fairly characterize the problems in 2E and 3E as letting the flavor and exceptions wag the core design too much.  I suppose the flip side of that argument is that some would say that 4E tied the flavor tail to a splint to keep it from wagging the core design at all. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />  Now, the question of what is popular and sells is pertinent and related but ultimately separate.  That's one of the reasons why we collectively keep having such strong disagreements about these things:  The differences in what people prefer (or think they prefer) as a fun game versus what they think will sell (or will produce a gravy train they can jump onto themselves) versus what actually works.</blockquote>

Verification