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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jer" data-source="post: 3737016" data-attributes="member: 19857">Is there any context from the designers/developers surrounding the claims of "the math is different"?I've read people saying that this is claimed, but I haven't seen the context of where it's being claimed for myself.Some speculation, though, just based on the phrase:* If it's Mike Mearls making the claim "the math is different", it may be in relation to how encounters are scaled and how monsters are created.  This seems to be one of his pet bugaboos about third edition.  He's definitely talked about how the statistics and formulas underlying the monsters of third edition don't make for an easy encounter/monster creation paradigm on the podcasts, so I suspect that part of the "different math" will be there.* It may be in reference to how feats and class bonuses interact with each other.  Right now if you have a fighter, you pretty much know what feats your fighter is going to have to be an effective fighter - you're going to take Weapon Focus, for example.  With the addition of "maneuver"-type effects to the game, could change the dynamic of an encounter and may affect the numerical benefit that some feats provide in different ways.  Especially if, as they've said, your choice of weapon as a fighter is going to change the playstyle of that character.* I suspect that it may also be referencing the idea that characters are going to be getting a lot more feats in this edition than in third edition.  This is a change that showed up in Saga edition and I'd be surprised if it didn't carry over into fourth edition D&D.  Changing the number of feats you can get changes the way that those feats are going to be designed (as mike mearls also mentioned in one of the podcasts).Just some thoughts.</blockquote>

Verification