Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Victoly" data-source="post: 5795317" data-attributes="member: 35127">When did &quot;they remain a challenge for longer&quot; become &quot;epic-level characters will still deal with Orcs!&quot;? Last time I checked the dictionary &quot;longer&quot; didn't mean &quot;forever&quot;. Blatant exaggerations make your complaints seem silly, not stronger.FitzTheRuke hit the nail on the head with his commentary about rolling 17s, but I'd like to add that, from a narrative perspective, it's nice for the rules to be able to support a plotline where a certain faction or race - say, an Orcish cult of a slaughter deity, for example - can remain a significant threat for a good chunk of the campaign (around 4 levels or so). In 3E the DM would either have to do a ton of work in doing advancement on monster tables or they'd have to do a ton of playing off-the-cuff, neither of which is ideal. 4E was better with that in general, and I'm glad they'll be keeping that in mind with the design of the new edition.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Victoly, post: 5795317, member: 35127"] When did "they remain a challenge for longer" become "epic-level characters will still deal with Orcs!"? Last time I checked the dictionary "longer" didn't mean "forever". Blatant exaggerations make your complaints seem silly, not stronger. FitzTheRuke hit the nail on the head with his commentary about rolling 17s, but I'd like to add that, from a narrative perspective, it's nice for the rules to be able to support a plotline where a certain faction or race - say, an Orcish cult of a slaughter deity, for example - can remain a significant threat for a good chunk of the campaign (around 4 levels or so). In 3E the DM would either have to do a ton of work in doing advancement on monster tables [I]or[/I] they'd have to do a ton of playing off-the-cuff, neither of which is ideal. 4E was better with that in general, and I'm glad they'll be keeping that in mind with the design of the new edition. [/QUOTE]

Verification