Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5820871" data-attributes="member: 54877">The graph is just another, abstract way of looking at the same thing already discussed in the text. &nbsp;For a particular example, think of it terms of different ratios of hit points, damage resistance, and damage effects. Say that you have a game where early creatures routinely have 5 DR and 6 hit points. This is bad, because it leaves no appreciable room between standard and strong. Roll 5 damage or less, do nothing. Roll 6 or more, kill the target.&nbsp; And there is no &quot;weak&quot; at all--you go from standard to useless in one point of damage.&nbsp;So then some wise guy decides to fix this by making a mechanic where the wizard doesn't have to roll an attack roll. Now, depending on his damage, he is either useless (always hit but never does anything) or overpowered (always hits and kills). &nbsp;The point of the graph is that there have been too many mechanics like that in D&amp;D, where they try all kinds of weird stuff to make up for the fact that there is insufficient design space between &quot;weak&quot; and &quot;standard&quot; and &quot;strong&quot;. Not that extreme, usually, but still too small a space--especially when you could fix it by maybe not having 5 DR and 6 hit points. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue&nbsp; &nbsp; :p"&nbsp; data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5820871, member: 54877"] The graph is just another, abstract way of looking at the same thing already discussed in the text. For a particular example, think of it terms of different ratios of hit points, damage resistance, and damage effects. Say that you have a game where early creatures routinely have 5 DR and 6 hit points. This is bad, because it leaves no appreciable room between standard and strong. Roll 5 damage or less, do nothing. Roll 6 or more, kill the target. And there is no "weak" at all--you go from standard to useless in one point of damage. So then some wise guy decides to fix this by making a mechanic where the wizard doesn't have to roll an attack roll. Now, depending on his damage, he is either useless (always hit but never does anything) or overpowered (always hits and kills). The point of the graph is that there have been too many mechanics like that in D&D, where they try all kinds of weird stuff to make up for the fact that there is insufficient design space between "weak" and "standard" and "strong". Not that extreme, usually, but still too small a space--especially when you could fix it by maybe not having 5 DR and 6 hit points. :p [/QUOTE]

Verification