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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="dave2008" data-source="post: 7926383" data-attributes="member: 83242">OK, you have a fundamental ignorance or misunderstanding of what I am talking about.  I, personally, like the idea that monsters can vary in strength across two axis.  The level-axis (let's all it the X-axis) is what everyone is familiar with: as a monster goes up in level (CR or HD on other editions) the monster get's tougher.  That difference can be dialed up or down, it can use increasing bonus, or hit points or both.  Both PF2e & 5e do this in different ways.  What 4e did, and what I would like PF2e and 5e to do, was to introduce the Y-axis.  So in PF2e is case, a monster along the Y-axis would get tougher or weaker, but share the same basic math as the standard monster.  Let's look at an example: the OgreThe lvl 3 Ogre Warrior has an AC 17, HP 50, +12 to hit, 12 avg damage; the lvl 7 Ogre Boss has AC 25, HP 130, +19 to hit, 16 dmg.That's great, the Boss is a lot tougher.  I have no issue with that.  However, what I like about 4e is you could also have the lvl 3 Ogre Elite Warrior:  AC 17, HP 100; +12 to hit; 16 dmg (or whatever).  Basically the Ogre is tougher, but primarily on the damage and HP scale.  The elite tag lets me know at glance, this monster is with about 2x the non-elite version and it provides an option that isn't reliant on hitting, missing, and criticals.Look, I have no issue with the PF2e approach.  It is tried and true, I just like more options and the 4e approach could get you the best of both worlds. You can keep your deadly +4 lvl Boss, and have slightly tougher +0 lvl (but more XP) elites.  Basically, level becomes and indicator of hit and be hit probability and only part of the overall difficulty equation.  It just has more flexibility which I like, with a bit more complexity which I find acceptable, YMMV.</blockquote>

Verification