Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Argyle King" data-source="post: 6262014" data-attributes="member: 58416">I'm not necessarily advocating &quot;process sim&quot; because I feel that implies that I want a D&amp;D game which is 'more realistic.'&nbsp; To be fair, I would like that, but it's not what I'm advocating.&nbsp; I'm advocating something similar to what 3rd Edition did in that virtually everything in the game runs on the same math, but I am most certainly not advocating the 3rd Edition methodology.Take the 4E approach of having PCs and monsters being built differently.&nbsp; I'm 100% ok with that.&nbsp; However, figure out a way to take that approach yet still have the 'PC Math' and 'non-PC Math' be more similar to the math which the game world is built upon.&nbsp; I believe it to be possible.&nbsp; Give me options, but have them be actual options instead of &quot;well, I can pick one of these seven ok options or I can pick the one option which is obviously better than the rest.&quot;&nbsp; I believe that is possible too.&nbsp; So, 4E methodology and 4E style flatter math, but more consistent and unified math in the vein of 3E.&nbsp; Monsters being built differently doesn't need to mean that they are built on a completely different set of assumptions than PCs.&nbsp; If 5E can manage to do that, I'll be happy.&nbsp; If 5E can manage to do that and still manage to be a simpler game (which I believe is possible to do,) that would be best.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Argyle King, post: 6262014, member: 58416"] I'm not necessarily advocating "process sim" because I feel that implies that I want a D&D game which is 'more realistic.' To be fair, I would like that, but it's not what I'm advocating. I'm advocating something similar to what 3rd Edition did in that virtually everything in the game runs on the same math, but I am most certainly not advocating the 3rd Edition methodology. Take the 4E approach of having PCs and monsters being built differently. I'm 100% ok with that. However, figure out a way to take that approach yet still have the 'PC Math' and 'non-PC Math' be more similar to the math which the game world is built upon. I believe it to be possible. Give me options, but have them be actual options instead of "well, I can pick one of these seven ok options or I can pick the one option which is obviously better than the rest." I believe that is possible too. So, 4E methodology and 4E style flatter math, but more consistent and unified math in the vein of 3E. Monsters being built differently doesn't need to mean that they are built on a completely different set of assumptions than PCs. If 5E can manage to do that, I'll be happy. If 5E can manage to do that and still manage to be a simpler game (which I believe is possible to do,) that would be best. [/QUOTE]

Verification