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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 8501181" data-attributes="member: 7006">Heh... well like I said above... if you're running a table for 4 PCs of the Basic Rules Core 4 the encounter building rules work pretty well.  But granted that's not said specifically anywhere, so it's only by playing the game with all manner of tables and characters away from that baseline do we notice just how much the rules fall away.But because there is no way to make a balanced set of encounter building rules that could be 'plug and play' for every number of player count, every combination of classes from the PHB, every level of magical item ownership, and every variant rule inclusion... the game doesn't bother trying.  It just requires every DM to basically learn how to create their own encounter building rules for their own tables.Which does ask the question that if these rules they do include only really work as precisely as some players think they should for that one specific Core Four 4 PC table... should they even have bothered to include any rules whatsoever?  Which I think is a legitimate question we could ask.  If the rules won't necessarily work for 99.9% of all the tables out there, are they actually worth including them at all and probably misrepresenting themselves to almost everyone who reads them?For me, my impulse is to say 'Yeah... I think?... if only for the completely new D&D and RPG player who has no concept of building encounters at all in the first place and it gives them an idea and examples of what encounters could actually look like.'  But even then, I suspect even completely new players who weren't using the Starter Set and were creating their own fights are probably owners and users of the PHB, which means their table won't be a Core Four 4 PC one either.  So again, the rules end up being relatively useless for them if they are trying to follow them to the word.  Which can be unfortunate.</blockquote>

Verification