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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bendris Noulg" data-source="post: 1330123" data-attributes="member: 6398">Actually, no, it isn't... DMG, Page 100 Encounters>Challenge Ratings and Encounter LevelsA monster's Challenge Rating (CR) tells you the level of the party for which that monster is a good challenge.  A monster of CR5 is an appropriate challenge for a group of four 5th-Level characters... Page 101What's Challenging [Side-Bar on the bottom]...By contrast, an encounter even one or two levels above the party level might tax the PCs to their limit, although with luck they might be able to take on two such encounters before needing to recover.  Remember that when the EL is higher than the party level, the chance for PC fatality raises dramatically. So, no, it doesn't encourage it.  It actually warns against it with words of caution that, more than advise the GM, scare players into perceiving what is "appropriate" and what isn't despite any other considerations that experienced GMs can easily work around. The problem is that previously, most of the players that have joined my table have known that a good number of encounters are too dangerous for obvious methods (i.e., combat) to be effective and that these encounters must either be avoided or dealt with in other ways.  By 3E's balance, following the guidelines in the DMG ensures that "proper" encounters can be dealt with by any means (charge, stealth, magic, or otherwise) while still drawing about 15%-20% of the party's resources. What is on the rise is that, when the above isn't the case, new players (especially those that came into D&D after 3E's release) tend to cry "foul" and pull out the balance shovel to prove it.  This, then, results in poorer GMing skills, as GMs (not allowed to tinker with things or break the mold) are unable to determine for themselves what works and what doesn't and must cling to the training wheels provided by WotC because players are uncomfortable with other possibilities. It's really at the point (for me) that, if I've one open spot at my table, I'd take an veteran that's never played 3E over a player that knows 3E by heart but never played another edition, game, or system.  I'm fairly comfortable that the vet won't have any preconceptions about the importance of balance (beyond the definition of fairness) and thus won't be pulling out a calculator every time I make an encounter to ensure I'm doing it right.  I don't have that assurance with newer players; it's more often likely that they'll distrust any deviation rather than embrace it and adapt.</blockquote>

Verification