Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 4430787" data-attributes="member: 18280">I imagine that I'll be hearing about quite a few more flaws!&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />I would agree that an &quot;average adventurer or level X&quot; or even an &quot;average man of level X&quot; is easily defined in 3.x.&nbsp; Where baselines are troubling are, for example, what the average level should be.&nbsp; Or what ability scores (apart from Strength) mean in terms of a baseline.&nbsp; The demographics section of the DMG offers some idea, but it isn't clear that this idea is actually encouraged in practice.If the average guard is a Warrior 1 when the PCs are 1st level, what is the average guard when the PCs are 10th level?Like the first point, I am not certain that the baseline problem is inherent in the 3e ruleset.&nbsp; Like all the discussion of the DM being &quot;allowed&quot; to fudge in 4e, it could be that 3e tended to encourage certain problems, not due to the ruleset per se, but due to the way the ruleset was presented.&nbsp; Certainly the presentation of the ruleset in 4e is an improvement in this regard (IMHO).Anyway, that is what I am thinking.I appreciate your feedback, and will be happy to hear more from anyone.&nbsp; The better my initial understanding of the roots of problems with the ruleset as it exists, the better my chances of moulding a ruleset with wholly new problems (rather than mere rehashes of the old)!<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing&nbsp; &nbsp; :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" />RC</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 4430787, member: 18280"] I imagine that I'll be hearing about quite a few more flaws! ;) I would agree that an "average adventurer or level X" or even an "average man of level X" is easily defined in 3.x. Where baselines are troubling are, for example, what the average level should be. Or what ability scores (apart from Strength) mean in terms of a baseline. The demographics section of the DMG offers some idea, but it isn't clear that this idea is actually encouraged in practice. If the average guard is a Warrior 1 when the PCs are 1st level, what is the average guard when the PCs are 10th level? Like the first point, I am not certain that the baseline problem is inherent in the 3e ruleset. Like all the discussion of the DM being "allowed" to fudge in 4e, it could be that 3e tended to encourage certain problems, not due to the ruleset per se, but due to the way the ruleset was presented. Certainly the presentation of the ruleset in 4e is an improvement in this regard (IMHO). Anyway, that is what I am thinking. I appreciate your feedback, and will be happy to hear more from anyone. The better my initial understanding of the roots of problems with the ruleset as it exists, the better my chances of moulding a ruleset with wholly new problems (rather than mere rehashes of the old)! :lol: RC [/QUOTE]

Verification