Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6594701" data-attributes="member: 996">Those are guidelines, yes, so you don't want to follow them as if they were hard-and-fast rules.&nbsp; Which is fine, since they're not...&nbsp;No guideline has ever called for not using CR higher than the level of the PCs.'Adventuring day' exp budgets are, oddly, mostly about class balance.&nbsp; The more classes diverge from resource parity, the more the 'day length' distorts class balance.&nbsp; So you get an average to aim for.&nbsp; Not hitting that average affects class balance (if the deviation is consistent enough, rendering some otherwise viable classes non-viable, for instance), and it changes 'encounter balance' (that is, how challenging the same encounter will be for the same party).So following the guideline compensates for system failings in class and encounter balance - or, at least, avoids making them a lot worse.&nbsp; Part of CaW seems to be exploiting balance problems, and player-driven pacing is certainly one way of doing that, though, presumably, with the objective of distorting encounter balance in the players' favor (making encounters less challenging than 'designed'), and simply no concern over whether/how-much class balance is distorted (if one PC is obviated at the more advantageous pacing, he'd presumably be dropped for a more viable class, for instance, since that would maximize the party's effectiveness).Nod.&nbsp; So called 'Simulationists' would also probably like the idea of dragon-creation rules where you plug in 'size of jumbo jet' and get out 90 HD.&nbsp; The Tailored approach, OTOH, you punch in the HD and get the size.&nbsp; Not a huge difference as far as the system is concerned.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6594701, member: 996"] Those are guidelines, yes, so you don't want to follow them as if they were hard-and-fast rules. Which is fine, since they're not... No guideline has ever called for not using CR higher than the level of the PCs. 'Adventuring day' exp budgets are, oddly, mostly about class balance. The more classes diverge from resource parity, the more the 'day length' distorts class balance. So you get an average to aim for. Not hitting that average affects class balance (if the deviation is consistent enough, rendering some otherwise viable classes non-viable, for instance), and it changes 'encounter balance' (that is, how challenging the same encounter will be for the same party). So following the guideline compensates for system failings in class and encounter balance - or, at least, avoids making them a lot worse. Part of CaW seems to be exploiting balance problems, and player-driven pacing is certainly one way of doing that, though, presumably, with the objective of distorting encounter balance in the players' favor (making encounters less challenging than 'designed'), and simply no concern over whether/how-much class balance is distorted (if one PC is obviated at the more advantageous pacing, he'd presumably be dropped for a more viable class, for instance, since that would maximize the party's effectiveness). Nod. So called 'Simulationists' would also probably like the idea of dragon-creation rules where you plug in 'size of jumbo jet' and get out 90 HD. The Tailored approach, OTOH, you punch in the HD and get the size. Not a huge difference as far as the system is concerned. [/QUOTE]

Verification