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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Keenath" data-source="post: 4414221" data-attributes="member: 59792">Having used both systems (and being an object oriented programmer, actually), I don't know that I really buy that argument.  'It allows you to build the exact monster you can imagine'?  How so?  The 3e system is the one that says "You can't add another feat to this monster unless you give it three more hit dice, which come with a dozen-odd HP and +2 attack bonus and a bunch of other stuff."  It's 3rd edition that insists that a demon of X hit dice must have Y spell like abilities, whether they fit the concept or not, that a creature in full plate has a +8 armor bonus to AC, and provides zero guidelines for how much damage a new special ability should do.4e is the system that says, "Get these critical numbers right; other than that, go crazy and do what you like".Okay, I agree with that...Are you trying to say that 3e you start from the powers and work backward to figure out an appropriate level, while 4e has you start from the level and then make all the numbers work?I guess you could say that.  But since "what level do I want to use this at" is kind of the basic question, it seems a bit more logical to start there.  A lot of my quibble with 3e was that it was so hard to walk in the front with the intent of making a 7th level monster and still have the same concept when you finished running through the actuarial tables.Could you explain that a bit more?  I don't understand.  If I create a level 8 minotaur wrestler, I expect him to be a little tougher than the level 7 brutes and a little weaker than the level 9 brutes, and a little tougher than the level 8 artillery.What doesn't make logical sense?  I mean, if I'm making a level 8 monster, obviously I'm not going to write flavor text that he's the leader for a bunch of level 12 monsters, but that's the same in 3e and 4e both.</blockquote>

Verification