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: 7194019" data-attributes="member: 996">Oh, duh, I just realized:  and, of course, Adventurers have 6-8 encounter days while non-adventurers do not, because that one day the non-adventure might have had 6-8 encounters, the first one kills him (or sends him runnning for safety), while it just whet's the Adventurers' appetite (wonder what this ogre was doing here, we should track it back to its lair and see if there are more... the correspondence we found on that ogre-mage leader suggests there's a terrible plot coming to fruition soon, we should do something about it...   as opposed to "OMG! an Ogre!" :CRUNCH: ) That's how I see it.  Though more as limiting how you can portray the world, than the world itself. Funny, I feel the same way about experiencing the world through the PCs, and not caring for the novels, but feel the opposite way about NPCs with class levels.  The PCs could be the only PC-classed characters in the world, as far as I'm concerned - the classes & PC status don't just model their abilities, but their protagonism.  That's why I quite liked the NPC Classes from 3.x - and, contrarily, like the way 1e, 4e & 5e use stat-blocks for monsters and NPCs rather than PC-style 'builds.' But, you mean that in an after-the-fact way, I assume?  Not that the PCs are special at first level because that's going to happen, but that they prove to have been special at 15th after it has happened, because, at any prior point they might have been TPK'd and some other NPC party finished the AP? The real world is most definitely not built correctly.  **blasphemy deleted**  ..er... I mean, no DM crated the real world.  Yeah, that's a safe way to put it. Lol.  In the same sense that you could substitute 3 deadly encounters with a short rest after each or 18 easy encounters with a short rest every 6th for 6-8 medium-hard with a short rest every other, there's other considerations.  The number of rounds over the the day, and how long those encounters are, for instance.  To balance a class like the Barbarian, that cooks off a daily resource to gain  large a benefit for the whole encounter, with one like the Warlock that blasts away with encounter resources, and one like the wizard that does so with dailies, and one like the fighter or rogue that grinds away most of it's effectiveness in at-will abilities.  You can't just balance the total exp challenge over the day.  A three-trans-deadly-combat-encounter day, for instance, will favor the Barbarian with 3 rages rather obviously.  In a 6-encounter day, he only rages (and out-shines the fighter, say) in half those encounters.  In a 3 encounter day, he does so in all of 'em.  Similarly, for the barbarian to shine compared to the wizard, he'll need each of those 3 encounters to go long enough that his whole-encounter range stacks up to the wizard's spells as the wizard is forced to spend at least some round casting lower-level slots or using cantrips.  If it's a round or two of rage vs a round of Action Surge & one not vs a 9th level spell & an 8th, it's not going to exactly 'balance,' but if it's 8 rounds and half of them are spent casting cantrips, it evens out - though the fighter still needs a non-raging combat for his turn in the sun. It's a guideline.  Color inside it for usable encounter guidelines & class balance (if, for some strange reason, you want such things /and/ insist on playing D&D, /and/ insist on playing the current ed - that's 5e /trying/ to be accommodating to more styles, you can ignore guidelines and play however you did back in the day, or you can walk the tightrope...). Nod. There's a issue that can be a problem.  There are clear solutions to that problem, each with issues of their own.  Most of the discussion is driven by denying the issue, pointing out problems with the issues the solutions bring in, or shifting 'blame.'</blockquote>

Verification