Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Wulf Ratbane" data-source="post: 5016148" data-attributes="member: 94">The understanding of Lanchester's impact on 3e is frustratingly incomplete, but you know very well that if the &quot;pet&quot; (cohort, animal companion, or summoned creature) is robust enough to be at all meaningful in combat, by &quot;squaring&quot; it represents a significant increase in power. That doesn't necessarily mean that it is broken-- it represents party power, after all, which can be a good thing, even if that power is concentrated into the hands of just one player. It's brokenness is proportional to the &quot;fairness&quot; of having more power in the hands of one PC than another-- and of course there are plenty of other places in the rules where we are content to live with such imbalance.But it is absolutely fair to consider it an instant &quot;red flag.&quot; It's specious to claim that Lanchester's Square Law is a &quot;hypothetical&quot; at this point.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Wulf Ratbane, post: 5016148, member: 94"] The understanding of Lanchester's impact on 3e is frustratingly incomplete, but you know very well that if the "pet" (cohort, animal companion, or summoned creature) is robust enough to be at all meaningful in combat, by "squaring" it represents a significant increase in power. That doesn't necessarily mean that it is broken-- it represents party power, after all, which can be a good thing, even if that power is concentrated into the hands of just one player. It's brokenness is proportional to the "fairness" of having more power in the hands of one PC than another-- and of course there are plenty of other places in the rules where we are content to live with such imbalance. But it is absolutely fair to consider it an instant "red flag." It's specious to claim that Lanchester's Square Law is a "hypothetical" at this point. [/QUOTE]

Verification