Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Asisreo" data-source="post: 8091161" data-attributes="member: 7019027">We can't forget those that have stayed within the guidelines and still find the game unsatisfactory. There are many criticism to the game as you advise, the foremost being how a DM struggles to force 6-8 resource-extensive encounters over the course of a day, even in the midst of a dungeon. Another common complaint is how monotonous the experience can be when you're playing over a day meant to be a literal grind. By NPC monster assistants, I mean NPC's who don't have classes yet join into the fight. A guard, for instance, is not as great at helping the PC's as a Veteran is. More to the point, Magic Items are meant to be distributed and they even gave an expected number of magic items distributed by tiers yet they don't allow a DM who is curious about to-the-letter balance to introduce magic items without following these &quot;guidelines.&quot; But it says neither of these things. It says &quot;Hey, DM, this is the limit to what a party can handle.&quot; What I'm trying to understand is how can you so vehemently swear that these guidelines are what the game is balanced on when all you've been explaining is &quot;context clues are the answer.&quot;I can't say I was in the room where the designers balanced the game but I doubt you can either. My problem is that you're making a claim unsupported by anything when I'm trying to claim that you need better support for the claim you're making. If they meant to tell the DM's, explicitly, how many encounters make for a better play experience, why did they remove the sentence that did so in early playtests? It was a purposeful removal because they once did so but they wanted to move away, I imagine.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Asisreo, post: 8091161, member: 7019027"] We can't forget those that have stayed within the guidelines and still find the game unsatisfactory. There are many criticism to the game as you advise, the foremost being how a DM struggles to force 6-8 resource-extensive encounters over the course of a day, even in the midst of a dungeon. Another common complaint is how monotonous the experience can be when you're playing over a day meant to be a literal grind. By NPC monster assistants, I mean NPC's who don't have classes yet join into the fight. A guard, for instance, is not as great at helping the PC's as a Veteran is. More to the point, Magic Items are meant to be distributed and they even gave an expected number of magic items distributed by tiers yet they don't allow a DM who is curious about to-the-letter balance to introduce magic items without following these "guidelines." But it says neither of these things. It says "Hey, DM, this is the limit to what a party can handle." What I'm trying to understand is how can you so vehemently swear that these guidelines are what the game is balanced on when all you've been explaining is "context clues are the answer." I can't say I was in the room where the designers balanced the game but I doubt you can either. My problem is that you're making a claim unsupported by anything when I'm trying to claim that you need better support for the claim you're making. If they meant to tell the DM's, explicitly, how many encounters make for a better play experience, why did they remove the sentence that did so in early playtests? It was a purposeful removal because they once did so but they wanted to move away, I imagine. [/QUOTE]

Verification