Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6299340" data-attributes="member: 6696971">I may have a lot to post on these subjects later but I just wanted to address this wrong premise.&nbsp; Subsequent extrapolation from an incorrect premise like this is going to make conversation impossible.&nbsp; The point of tight encounter guidelines, math, and budgeting is not system bias towards &quot;the desired outcome of the party winning.&quot;&nbsp; The point is to create a formalized, predictable, reproducable baseline for the GM.&nbsp; Accompanying that, the system framework and instructions should be robust such that it reliably forecasts the outcomes of perturbing that baseline up and down (from a walkover - if you, the GM, wishes - all the way up to an outright guaranteed TPK - if you, the GM, wishes).&nbsp; IME this is always important but even more important in a complex combat system such as 4e with as many vectors and moving parts that are part of the formula.&nbsp; These are GM-side tools to consistently facilitate whatever difficulty the GM is looking for out of a desired encounter.&nbsp; Framing the encounter and fairly telegraphing the difficulty is a GM principle, technique and skill thing.&nbsp; A tight formula is utterly indifferent to those aesthetics.I don't know why this absurd cultural meme that 4e specifically, and encounter budgeting generally, promotes this kiddy pool culture with everyone getting a medal nonsense.&nbsp; Since it didn't die on the vine where it should have, could we maybe put it on its pyre, light it up and dance on its stupid ashes now?&nbsp; No productive conversation can come from the fruits of such a distortion of basic premise (and the inevitably incorrect extrapolations made from it).&nbsp; I want tight, codified encounter guidelines, math, and budgeting for the exact same reason I want predictable forensic science and understanding to rely upon when I undergo an engineering project or when I'm performing sensitivity tests.&nbsp; It has nothing to do with &quot;coddling, kiddy pool, everyone gets a medal&quot; culture and neither the system specifically, nor the concept of encounter budgeting generally, promotes such a culture.&nbsp; It promotes precision and predictability (as a GM tool).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 6299340, member: 6696971"] I may have a lot to post on these subjects later but I just wanted to address this wrong premise. Subsequent extrapolation from an incorrect premise like this is going to make conversation impossible. The point of tight encounter guidelines, math, and budgeting is not system bias towards "the desired outcome of the party winning." The point is to create a formalized, predictable, reproducable baseline for the GM. Accompanying that, the system framework and instructions should be robust such that it reliably forecasts the outcomes of perturbing that baseline up and down (from a walkover - if you, the GM, wishes - all the way up to an outright guaranteed TPK - if you, the GM, wishes). IME this is always important but even more important in a complex combat system such as 4e with as many vectors and moving parts that are part of the formula. These are [U][I][B]GM-side tools to consistently facilitate whatever difficulty the GM is looking for out of a desired encounter[/B][/I][/U]. Framing the encounter and fairly telegraphing the difficulty is a GM principle, technique and skill thing. A tight formula is utterly indifferent to those aesthetics. I don't know why this absurd cultural meme that 4e specifically, and encounter budgeting generally, promotes this kiddy pool culture with everyone getting a medal nonsense. Since it didn't die on the vine where it should have, could we maybe put it on its pyre, light it up and dance on its stupid ashes now? No productive conversation can come from the fruits of such a distortion of basic premise (and the inevitably incorrect extrapolations made from it). I want tight, codified encounter guidelines, math, and budgeting for the exact same reason I want predictable forensic science and understanding to rely upon when I undergo an engineering project or when I'm performing sensitivity tests. It has nothing to do with "coddling, kiddy pool, everyone gets a medal" culture and neither the system specifically, nor the concept of encounter budgeting generally, promotes such a culture. It promotes precision and predictability (as a GM tool). [/QUOTE]

Verification