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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nemesis Destiny" data-source="post: 5408287" data-attributes="member: 98255">I have yet to play in a game involving the new monster numbers, so I guess this isn't much help, but I'll throw my two bits in anyway.My initial experience with the old math at the dawn of 4e was that it was plenty challenging as-is. Influencing factors included the fact that at the time we were all pretty new to 4e, and our DM tended toward the extreme end of the difficulty scale. Lots of Level +3 or level +4 encounters, one-on-one encounters with single regular monsters of level +5 or whatever it takes to make a level 1 or 2 encounter. Lots of whiffing, lots of players near death, but mostly lots of frustrating, drag-inducing whiffing.That may be as much inexperience with the system as any issue with the math, but anecdotally, I found that plenty hard. When I heard they were re-doing the math to make monsters harder I cringed. Less of a whiff fest? Sure. Harder? Not sure it is needed.On the other hand, our current DM says she has trouble challenging us. This may be that we're getting better at playing, but may also speak to the need for some stronger monsters, if not constantly, then at least as an option.Different types of monster for different situations; if you want to go 5-7 encounters in a marathon of adventuring, use the old math. If you are looking for a day with fewer but challenging battles, go for the new math. I don't know if that will work, but it sounds logical.I should note that both DMs I described above are fans of the fewer-is-better school of encounter design.So I guess I share your apprehension about the new math, though I have yet to DM a single 4e session (we're taking turns in our group, and my turn has yet to come up after 2.5 years; I'm getting the itch to DM again).</blockquote>

Verification