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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7186016" data-attributes="member: 996">Depends on the system.  Many could be completely unaffected by pacing an encounter per year, or 24 in a day, 0 issues.  So very wide.3.5 can't do 6+ encounters too well, because the party might start seeing character deaths, but that long a day is barely starting to turn the tide, so it's hard to say it ever works in the same sense balanced systems do. 5e needs 6-8, and a specific short/long rest ratio.  Nope, that breaks the short/long ratio.  You'd need 3 encounter with a rest after each.  They'd also need to be deadly encounters,  and that further shifts the dynamic to the most potent daily resources being the most important.  They'd also need to be unusually long encounters to burn through all those resources and give things a chance to even out, and 5e doesn't handle that well, either.   Maybe, if you handled it well, you go from elephant to hippo.     Not an uncommon one, though 2/day would also have serious issues.   That's the nature of the elephant, it's unacknowledged.  I quite enjoyed 3e for the whole 8-year run, and'll still play 3.0 when I get the chance.  But I'm not reticent about ripping things I like when they have real issues. 3e was intentionally imbalanced on top of all the unintended balance issues a bloated list-based system is heir to.  Just the reality of it.Hitting a magic number of encounters would barely begin to impose balance on it. Not unusual, the 5MWD goes way back.  Attrition balance is fundamentally flawed, that way.  It takes something fixed/abstract, like 13A heal-ups, or something unthinkable radical, like classless design, to make it work. OK, that's fair.But plenty had neen layered on.  Including standards of Vtude & tradition that demand radical class imbalance, checked only by improbably long days.</blockquote>

Verification