Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kenada" data-source="post: 8150831" data-attributes="member: 70468">What I’m exploring is completely decoupling these things from the expected progression, so GMs can decide if and when they hand them out. If GMs want to drop striking runes and reserve devastating attacks as a divine boon handed out for service to the church, they can do that and understand the implications for building encounters.Right, which suggests they are being out there because the PCs are expected to be more powerful (or the adventure writers still haven’t gotten the knack of the system yet, but let’s assume the former).The game also expects PCs to acquire skill boosts, so that makes sense. If you don’t hand out those items or provide automatic progression, than everything should stay about the same.I’m only concerned about party composition to the extent that it’s affected by itemization.It’s been a while, so I can’t remember whether Paizo tends to overcompensate with treasure under the assumption that PC won’t find all of it. Let’s assume they get exactly the right amount. Based on the assumptions that things get easier as you level (i.e., see above re: DCs), then things should stay about the same relative difficulty if PCs never acquire treasure.Yes, exactly this. I’m not discussing whether this is nonstandard or not. I’m trying to suss out the affect of expected itemization on the guidelines, so that it can be made truly optional while preserving the functionality of the guidelines for building encounters. Essentially, I want to preserve the intuition developed building and running lower level encounters for higher levels when these things are in play.Those ranges correspond very toughly to when you are expected to get striking runes or devastating attacks. I say roughly because the expectation is a few levels sooner for both, but I think the point still works.What you suggest is the same as what I suggest. When I say to shift to base level for moderate encounters, that’s the same as using severe or low in place if moderate encounters (depending on which way you are shifting). The point of shifting is to preserve the full range of the guidelines as well as the GM’s understand of what they mean.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">level − 1: 30/40/60/80/120</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">level (standard): 40/60/80/120/160</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">level + 1: 60/80/120/160/240</li> </ul>Again, the point here is to explore the affect itemization has on the guidelines. There’s certainly an argument to be made that things should get easier as PCs gain levels. That was essentially the idea behind my post in the D&D forums here regarding static DCs. I also expect that most people will reward those items in some form if for no reason that players expect them, so this may not be a particularly worthwhile exercise beyond the knowledge gained.</blockquote>

Verification