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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Fanaelialae" data-source="post: 5061005" data-attributes="member: 53980">I think, all other things being equal, swingy must at least have the potential to be shorter.  Save or die is a perfect example of a swingy mechanic.  Assume that you have two almost identical games, except that one has SoD and the other doesn't.  Also assume that it takes 4 rounds to kill someone using damage in both games.  Assuming that SoD is available as a resource, the SoD game must have at least some shorter combats, because it has a mechanic for killing an enemy in 1 round rather than 4.  Even if the odds of avoiding the SoD are only 25% (and therefore the average rounds of both systems are the same), the swingier game will have shorter combats now and again because the SoD user will have a string of good fortune and his adversaries will all fail their saves. I have to disagree here.  Giving the heroes a heartier buffer is an anti-swing element.  A level 1 wizard in 3e might have 4 hp and be taken down by a single attack from a goblin.  The same wizard in 4e might have over 20 hp and will certainly not fall to a single attack from a goblin (not even from a crit).  The difference in damage between the two goblins isn't exactly huge, with the 4e gob actually dealing more.  3e is clearly the swingier system in this example.Keep in mind that I think using the term grindy when describing 4e is a bit of a misnomer.  4e is less swingy than 3e to be certain, but there's still a fair bit of swing  (a lucky string of crits will almost certainly swing combat in the party's favor).  Hence, I think the term "less swingy" (when compared to previous editions) is a better fit.</blockquote>

Verification