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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 4867217" data-attributes="member: 710">I think they did, just not the way you expected - I mentioned "smart play" - stuff like using flanking/combat advantage and similar things. I think they are supposed to remind you of the difference.And of course, the "sweet spot" success percentage is not fixed. You can fight monsters of different levels, and monsters of different roles also have different defenses. But the difference to earlier editions is - you have the same variance at every level. So every level you notice when you are doing good (be it because of smart play or just because a weakness of the monsters you fight) and when you are not doing good. It is the same thing as with the "class balance". In early editions, it was considered "balanced" that spellcasters start weaker at low levels and grow stronger at high levels. But it turned out that many people didn't like it - avoiding play of low level casters and switching (if in any way possible) to high level casters at higher levels. Instead of looking at the entirety of the level range, the balance became more important at every distinct level. I must admit, I find it a little sad that this approach doesn't work. It has a strong appeal, that's for sure. But play experience overall (painting with broad brushes) seems to suggest it's just not that satisfying. And in the end, the play experience is what matters, not some platonic ideal. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> Well, at least that is my opinion. What might be interesting is to create a "balanced" game at every level and changing some other ways the individual classes are played. Pre 3E editions introduced followers, basically as a class feature. 3E did away with that mostly - Unless you used the Leadership feat, which was open to anyone and most useful to those characters with a high Charisma (and thus Bards and Sorcerors benefited most from it.)In such an approach, a "Fighting Man" would turn into a "Fighting Army" - a single commander (the PC) accomponied by a group of mercenaries, and they could achieve similar power in combat than a Wizard or Cleric. Balancing this would be difficult (action economy vs spell effects?), but hey, if someone manages to do it, that could be awesome. Of course, not everyone wants to see his Fighter become a Warlord, so it's still not a satisfying solution for everyone. But nothing ever is.</blockquote>

Verification