Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Staffan" data-source="post: 8462789" data-attributes="member: 907">The idea was, I think, that the cleric would spend their turns in combat either buffing or bashing away with a mace, and use spells to heal outside of combat.The larger-scale idea was that one adventuring day would consist of four encounters with EL approximately equal to average party level, each of which would sap some resources from the party (resources primarily meaning hit points and prepared spells and other X/day abilities). So the first three encounters would mainly be &quot;sandbags&quot; whom the party would overcome fairly easily but at some cost, and then you finish off with a &quot;boss&quot; encounter with EL equal to party level +1 or +2, which the party would normally win against fairly easily, but now that they're worn down it's kind of fair.One problem with that design is that the wand of CLW breaks it completely. Hit points entirely become a per-encounter resource, and healers don't need to expend daily resources to heal, but can instead focus on offense. Another problem is that it's boring design. Three encounters out of four are basically only preparation for the major encounter, where the point is to wear you down to where the final encounter becomes exciting. That's the same kind of thinking that gets you the scoring in Britannia*, and that's no way to run a game.* [SPOILER=&quot;Britannia&quot;]Britannia is a board game about the invasions of various tribes and cultures of historical Great Britain, starting with the Romans and ending with the Normans. It's intended for four players, where you'll play different tribes throughout the game. Thing is, the player who starts with the Romans will rack up an enormous score at the beginning of the game, and then do almost nothing of consequence for the rest of the game until the final turns when they play the Norwegians. So their lead in the early game may be entirely illusory.[/SPOILER]</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Staffan, post: 8462789, member: 907"] The idea was, I think, that the cleric would spend their turns in combat either buffing or bashing away with a mace, and use spells to heal outside of combat. The larger-scale idea was that one adventuring day would consist of four encounters with EL approximately equal to average party level, each of which would sap some resources from the party (resources primarily meaning hit points and prepared spells and other X/day abilities). So the first three encounters would mainly be "sandbags" whom the party would overcome fairly easily but at some cost, and then you finish off with a "boss" encounter with EL equal to party level +1 or +2, which the party would normally win against fairly easily, but now that they're worn down it's kind of fair. One problem with that design is that the wand of CLW breaks it completely. Hit points entirely become a per-encounter resource, and healers don't need to expend daily resources to heal, but can instead focus on offense. Another problem is that it's [B]boring[/B] design. Three encounters out of four are basically only preparation for the major encounter, where the point is to wear you down to where the final encounter becomes exciting. That's the same kind of thinking that gets you the scoring in Britannia*, and that's no way to run a game. * [SPOILER="Britannia"]Britannia is a board game about the invasions of various tribes and cultures of historical Great Britain, starting with the Romans and ending with the Normans. It's intended for four players, where you'll play different tribes throughout the game. Thing is, the player who starts with the Romans will rack up an enormous score at the beginning of the game, and then do almost nothing of consequence for the rest of the game until the final turns when they play the Norwegians. So their lead in the early game may be entirely illusory.[/SPOILER] [/QUOTE]

Verification