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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Brian Gibbons" data-source="post: 4299410" data-attributes="member: 7369">In 4e, if you believe that increasing the AC of a creature to 35 is appropriate, you can do so, and choose to give any (or no) explanation as you choose.The 3e paradigm is that as long as your methods follow the rules everything is balanced.  You can choose to give a 10th level fighter no armor or full plate, and it's still a CR 10 creature.  This, unfortunately, is much less true in practice than on paper.The 4e paradigm is that the end result matters, not how you got there.  If a creature is balanced with an AC of 24, then you should be wary of making its AC 14 or 34 instead, even if you can accomplish that by swapping out legal feats or equipment.  You can make any changes you want (because, hey, you're the GM), but you need to take responsibility for your changes, as there is notpretense that changing combat statistics has no effect on balance.Which paradigm is better for you depends on the type of game you run.The 3e paradigm is useful in games with a player vs. GM mindset, where the idea is that the players try to create the most powerful PCs they can within the rules, and the GM attempts to kill them with encounters that are technically deemed by the rules to be an appropriate EL.The 4e paradigm is useful in games with a more cooperative mindset, with the GM attempting to challenge the PCs with appropriate opponents to develop an enjoyable campaign for all involved.</blockquote>

Verification