Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="eamon" data-source="post: 4979870" data-attributes="member: 51942">From a player's perspective, that seems like an unnecessary limitation of options.  Why do this?This is also completely unreasonable. The low NAD's are not due to player decisions but due to an imbalance in the base game.  If you compare (for instance) 18/14/11 with 16/14/13/etc. you'll note that the standard array's lowest NAD is one point higher, whereas the it's highest nad is one lower.  All in all, that's probably a loss simply because your lowest NAD will often be hit no matter what (the difference between being hit on a 10 vs. an 11 matters more than the difference between being hit on a 2 vs 3, and obvious much more than the difference between being hit on 2 vs anything below 2).Punishing players for not being able to keep their lowest NAD relevant is ridiculous; the vast majority of characters have no real options to avoid being trivially easy to hit for the vast majority of NAD-targetting monsters - which, going by the numbers, are rare and only likely to be prevalent if the DM is actively out to screw you.  Which we all know a DM can do anyhow.</blockquote>