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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AngryPurpleCyclops" data-source="post: 4706932" data-attributes="member: 82732">I don't mean to come across as defensive and I certainly don;t feel defensive.  I definitely didn't explode.  I'm just very direct/blunt and rather than waste my time discussing things that don't matter, I try and lead the conversation back to the relevant situations.  I actually enjoy discussing things with you specifically and others in general.  We don't always have to agree and i'm fine with that.  I just find it a little tiresome when people argue about something without contributing data that matters.  If you've been in 7 encounters that didn't need healing, I guess we're playing a different game.  I would quit a campaign that had no threat of death because tactics don't matter and build doesn't matter.  7 encounters with no healing is ridiculous.  Not at all what the designers envisioned and not at all the game I want to play.  Are there any hard encounters?  Is rolling dice and slaying inferior foes repeatedly without any "adrenaline factor" fun?  Not for me.  Why chime in about the value of healing if you play in a campaign that doesn't use it?  The first part of the argument is good.  It provides analysis and reasons why you feel ghouls are broken.  I feel soldiers are under priced exp wise so we're not far off in this regard.The second part of your argument is the definition of a straw man argument.  My original argument was that the no cleric build would likely perish vs 3 ghouls and then you turn around and talk about 5.  This is an annoying tactic.  Why bother responding if you can't respond to the arguments as presented?  Either agree that the clerics utility is frequently massive or try and show me a build without them that can reliably handle debilitating effects like stun.it's not just the ghoul encounter that crushes builds with no cleric, it's just one that shows the deficiency in the clearest manner.I still would like you to clearly define an encounter of at least N+2 (preferably N+3 since that's really where the game changes from a foregone conclusion to a struggle where tactics and builds actually matter) where you're not taking damage and in need of healing.  There's clearly an occasional encounter where the pc's gain a dominating position or an opportunity to move an encounter to a place of the pc's choosing and likely advantage but not all the time and not even the majority of the time.  Monsters in our campaigns retreat from certain death (not undead or mindless things) but anything with a survival instinct doesn't stand in the corridor watching the pc's lob AoE's into them while one bad guy fights in the doorway.You keep repeatedly responding on a thread but don't give even moderate details to support your position.  Honestly I don't know why anyone would debate about encounters below N+2.</blockquote>

Verification