Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ahnehnois" data-source="post: 6155795" data-attributes="member: 17106">I'm skeptical that its stated goal is realistically achievable.Your preferences are your own, but I don't think I want to see the converse, i.e. a "predictable" game.I really don't need to be told that.In your example, you indicated that their average EL was significantly higher than what the DMG recommends, if I understood it correctly. Which would suggest that even they realized that a "challenging" encounter as described in the DMG was often too easy to provide any meaningful enjoyment. It also seems to me that those organized play situations impose a variety of rules that are more restrictive than the game itself; I don't think that anyone believes that the rules themselves require that the party faces a particular mix of challenges.In Living Greyhawk, they were rules. In the game of D&D itself, they're guidelines or suggestions. The section in the DMG is pretty clear about that, and even there quite a few limitations are acknowledged.I don't suggest following those guidelines, but regardless of whether one does or not, they are not rules.Numbers added. Personally, I'd rather skip steps 1 and 2 and get straight to 3.That's the problem with CRs. They are self-justifying. You can't really know how unnecessary they are until you try playing a game where they're ignored and see that it works.Even using those very strict limitations I don't think it is. There are just way too many variables. A four fighter party is enormously different from a four cleric party (or any other mix). A party built for monster hunting is different than a party built for urban intrigue. Equipment varies enormously. Situational factors and tactics vary enormously. Monsters and NPCs vary enormously.And how many people ever played the game that way?</blockquote>

Verification