Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AaronOfBarbaria" data-source="post: 6725080" data-attributes="member: 6701872">I strongly disagree. A kraken by itself is terrifying for any but the most high-level characters.I think it is more accurate to say that it is a collection of hammers, and it turns your favorite sea-faring vessel into the anvil.I find it difficult to take people's opinions of how 5th edition works seriously when they make statements like this one.Yes, if a PC fights a monster fully outside that monster's context in a scenario that bends every advantage to the PC's exclusive benefit... but saying &quot;when you design an encounter so that the monster is set up to fail, the monster fails,&quot; is kind of obvious, I think.This is theory-craft used inappropriately because it intentionally confirms a bias by using a scenario that really only comes up if the DM says &quot;I want to use this monster, but I also want to completely hamstring it on purpose.&quot;You roll up your choice of 1st level character, I'll set up a scenario in which a kraken actually makes sense as an encounter, and we'll see which one comes out the victor - or, we can cut to the chase and say &quot;yeah, no, that's a ridiculous idea that wouldn't actually demonstrate anything useful.&quot;White-room theory-craft has a place - this is not it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AaronOfBarbaria, post: 6725080, member: 6701872"] I strongly disagree. A kraken by itself is terrifying for any but the most high-level characters. I think it is more accurate to say that it is a collection of hammers, and it turns your favorite sea-faring vessel into the anvil. I find it difficult to take people's opinions of how 5th edition works seriously when they make statements like this one. Yes, if a PC fights a monster fully outside that monster's context in a scenario that bends every advantage to the PC's exclusive benefit... but saying "when you design an encounter so that the monster is set up to fail, the monster fails," is kind of obvious, I think. This is theory-craft used inappropriately because it intentionally confirms a bias by using a scenario that really only comes up if the DM says "I want to use this monster, but I also want to completely hamstring it on purpose." You roll up your choice of 1st level character, I'll set up a scenario in which a kraken actually makes sense as an encounter, and we'll see which one comes out the victor - or, we can cut to the chase and say "yeah, no, that's a ridiculous idea that wouldn't actually demonstrate anything useful." White-room theory-craft has a place - this is not it. [/QUOTE]

Verification