Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 333049" data-attributes="member: 177">Can you build a system that would do it better than the DMGs CRs?&nbsp; Possibly.&nbsp; Probably.&nbsp; That begs the question - Should you do so?There's an old maxim in the writing biz - for every equation, you lose half your audience.&nbsp; While not strictly true, it is demonstrative - the more complicated the system, the less people will want to use it.&nbsp; For each user, you reach a point where the added accuracy isn't worth the trouble.When you note that there seem to be a significant number of people who feel the current CR/XP system is already too complex, then this becomes even more of an issue.&nbsp; You don't gain anything by giving more accurare CRs if you lose the DMs who might use it.Then, there's simple gaming philosophy to consider - should XP awards ever be more than a guideline?&nbsp; In a roll-playing game, then perhaps yes, it could be doen by formulae.&nbsp; If the only consideration is the tactics and mechanics of combat, then fully mechanized and accurate XP awards might make sense.&nbsp; However, D&amp;D is billed as a role-playing game.&nbsp; I'm not yet convinced that a system that forces the DM to think is at all inappropriate, given the number of subjective factors involved.&nbsp; Imagine, for example, the effect of having a certain personality type in a party - a paladin who refuses to use stealth.&nbsp; How much harder does that make your encounter?&nbsp; Can you put a number on it? We're talking, effectively, about measuring the relative power of a creature to the party.&nbsp; The science of measurement is pretty clear on one thing - there comes a point where increasing the precision of your ruler ceases to be helpful, as other sources of error prevent accurate use of said ruler.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 333049, member: 177"] Can you build a system that would do it better than the DMGs CRs? Possibly. Probably. That begs the question - [i]Should[/i] you do so? There's an old maxim in the writing biz - for every equation, you lose half your audience. While not strictly true, it is demonstrative - the more complicated the system, the less people will want to use it. For each user, you reach a point where the added accuracy isn't worth the trouble. When you note that there seem to be a significant number of people who feel the current CR/XP system is [i]already[/i] too complex, then this becomes even more of an issue. You don't gain anything by giving more accurare CRs if you lose the DMs who might use it. Then, there's simple gaming philosophy to consider - should XP awards ever be more than a guideline? In a [i]roll[/i]-playing game, then perhaps yes, it could be doen by formulae. If the only consideration is the tactics and mechanics of combat, then fully mechanized and accurate XP awards might make sense. However, D&D is billed as a [i]role[/i]-playing game. I'm not yet convinced that a system that forces the DM to think is at all inappropriate, given the number of subjective factors involved. Imagine, for example, the effect of having a certain personality type in a party - a paladin who refuses to use stealth. How much harder does that make your encounter? Can you put a number on it? We're talking, effectively, about measuring the relative power of a creature to the party. The science of measurement is pretty clear on one thing - there comes a point where increasing the precision of your ruler ceases to be helpful, as other sources of error prevent accurate use of said ruler. [/QUOTE]

Verification