Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AeroDm" data-source="post: 5565993" data-attributes="member: 13650">I did not intend for it to be limited to D&amp;D but that is the RPG I am the most familiar with so it will inevitably be more applicable of D&amp;D than anything else. The article actually has almost nothing in common for this thread but for its, as Umbran pointed out, sensationalist hook, so I'm mostly whinging it here. But a monster becomes obsolete when it no longer serves as an adequate challenge under its governing rule set. Does this mean it can be made &quot;not obsolete&quot; just by using it against characters of a lower level? Sure, you bet. But that is a &quot;see the tree and miss the forest&quot; style fix.The actual article dealt with why power creep emerges (not whether or not it is bad) and how, for the most part, it is the result of really positive things and positive goals. So again, whingin' it. I'd say that the introduction of stacking in 3e was the start of excellent game design. It introduced a natural obsolescence that was part of the game and allowed the DM to provide big rewards that had modest impact. You could spend levels seeking out a +5 sword and because it was replacing the +4 sword you got by casting a spell each combat, the incremental power boost was more modest than the reward felt. Now we eventually learned that +1 or +2 from a dozen sources still tends to break the game, but it was a tremendous first step.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AeroDm, post: 5565993, member: 13650"] I did not intend for it to be limited to D&D but that is the RPG I am the most familiar with so it will inevitably be more applicable of D&D than anything else. The article actually has almost nothing in common for this thread but for its, as Umbran pointed out, sensationalist hook, so I'm mostly whinging it here. But a monster becomes obsolete when it no longer serves as an adequate challenge under its governing rule set. Does this mean it can be made "not obsolete" just by using it against characters of a lower level? Sure, you bet. But that is a "see the tree and miss the forest" style fix. The actual article dealt with why power creep emerges (not whether or not it is bad) and how, for the most part, it is the result of really positive things and positive goals. So again, whingin' it. I'd say that the introduction of stacking in 3e was the start of excellent game design. It introduced a natural obsolescence that was part of the game and allowed the DM to provide big rewards that had modest impact. You could spend levels seeking out a +5 sword and because it was replacing the +4 sword you got by casting a spell each combat, the incremental power boost was more modest than the reward felt. Now we eventually learned that +1 or +2 from a dozen sources still tends to break the game, but it was a tremendous first step. [/QUOTE]

Verification