Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9853798" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Not for this thing though.I know you love to inflate the issues with 4e and downplay those of other editions, but on this you are just flat wrong. Yes, they changed the monster math. The change wasn't &quot;oh god, our numbers are so useless you have no idea whether things really work or not, we have to fix it!!&quot; It was, &quot;Well crap. We thought folks wanted careful, slow-burn battle experiences, but what they actually wanted was frenetic, fast-pace battle experiences. Cut the HP, boost the damage output.&quot;Both of them were well-balanced. (Which also proves that the balance wasn't some incredibly delicate machine destroyed by the tiniest changes; they changed a bunch of stats and it still worked really well.) One was balanced for a &quot;figure out the puzzle of this combat&quot; approach; the other was balanced for a &quot;are you bad enough dudes to rescue the president&quot; approach. The latter was much more popular, but a textbook example of too little, too late.5e, like the previous edition that used CR, is nothing like this. Every encounter has to be art, because there's no meaningful science to it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 9853798, member: 6790260"] Not for [I]this thing[/I] though. I know you love to inflate the issues with 4e and downplay those of other editions, but on this you are just flat wrong. Yes, they changed the monster math. The change wasn't "oh god, our numbers are so useless you have no idea whether things really work or not, we have to fix it!!" It was, "Well crap. We thought folks wanted careful, slow-burn battle experiences, but what they actually wanted was frenetic, fast-pace battle experiences. Cut the HP, boost the damage output." Both of them were well-balanced. (Which also proves that the balance wasn't some incredibly delicate machine destroyed by the tiniest changes; they changed a bunch of stats and it [I]still worked really well[/I].) One was balanced for a "figure out the puzzle of this combat" approach; the other was balanced for a "are you bad enough dudes to rescue the president" approach. The latter was much more popular, but a textbook example of too little, too late. 5e, like the previous edition that used CR, is nothing like this. Every encounter [I]has to be[/I] art, because there's no meaningful science to it. [/QUOTE]

Verification