payn
Glory to Marik
I can say that every time the math is tightened (4E/PF2) I bounce right out. Its not a mathematically right discussion, but one of feel which is subjective. I enjoy not knowing exactly how a combat is going to go, and sometimes that means it goes pear shaped. Its more an art approach than a predictably reliable system. I also get why folks very much do not like that. They dont want to tinker and they dont want surprises.tight rules do not mean things have to be challenging, it just means they are pretty predictable
6-8 encounters per day does not feel like a combat-light story. If people can ignore that, they can also ignore 3-4 better controlled encounters and either reduce the number or challenge as needed.
I see no upside to loose math, there is nothing you gain from it. Anything you can do with loose math, you can do with tight math, there are however things you can do with tight math that just cannot be done with a loose one. The only ‘question’ is whether tight math is worth the effort, and WotC apparently has an answer.
That is interesting, but you cant opt out of that play loop either. D&D has to be flexible, or at least 5E was built with a modular mindset that folks are going to tailor it out of want or need.Ultimately I don’t think it is about tight math for me anyway, but about tradeoffs. If resting is always the strategically best way to go about things, it gets boring.
No idea how tight DS!’s math is, but I like its approach where the characters get stronger from not resting while their HP deplete. This is interesting whether the math is tight or not. It offers a dilemma and a choice. D&D’s approach does not, it is up to each DM to turn it into one (potentially against the interest of their players) or just roll with the punches / frequent rests.