Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lord Zardoz" data-source="post: 5204978" data-attributes="member: 704">Disregarding several pages of this thread, I will try to respond directly to the original posters questions.First, I think that the majority of players end up liking most, but not all of any given ruleset, and they will always feel the need to tweak it.As far as 4th edition, I would say that the perception of grind is highly dependent on what the DM uses for monsters in any given encounter, and how the PC's are built.&nbsp; Different groups, different combats.However, I think that there is one recurring reason people run into grindy combats.&nbsp; Specifically, any fight that results in combat being a foregone conclusion long before the last opponent is dropped.&nbsp; I am convinced that Dm's (and WoTC printed adventures) using monsters several levels higher then the players. (Ball park it at party level + 4 or higher), especially Soldier types, and Elites / Solo monsters.&nbsp; The higher hp, and greater AC will cause encounter and daily's to miss, and that will make a big difference in how interesting the combat is.Player HP and access to healing is greater then it used to be as well.&nbsp; So while a high damage output could drop someone in an earlier edition, a leader can stand up the dropped PC with a minor action.&nbsp; It is much more difficult to kill or threaten a PC with death then it used to be.To my mind, saying that 4th Edition is flawed in its combat system is like saying your Smart Car is flawed because you cannot go off roading in it.&nbsp; Cutting HP wont make nearly as much a difference as keeping monster levels closer to the PC's.Getting back to your question, I would say that you feel the need to customize or kludge a system because you are not getting the desired end result from the system based on how you wish to be able to use it.&nbsp; But that problem is not unique to any game system or game element.END COMMUNICATION</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lord Zardoz, post: 5204978, member: 704"] Disregarding several pages of this thread, I will try to respond directly to the original posters questions. First, I think that the majority of players end up liking most, but not all of any given ruleset, and they will always feel the need to tweak it. As far as 4th edition, I would say that the perception of grind is highly dependent on what the DM uses for monsters in any given encounter, and how the PC's are built. Different groups, different combats. However, I think that there is one recurring reason people run into grindy combats. Specifically, any fight that results in combat being a foregone conclusion long before the last opponent is dropped. I am convinced that Dm's (and WoTC printed adventures) using monsters several levels higher then the players. (Ball park it at party level + 4 or higher), especially Soldier types, and Elites / Solo monsters. The higher hp, and greater AC will cause encounter and daily's to miss, and that will make a big difference in how interesting the combat is. Player HP and access to healing is greater then it used to be as well. So while a high damage output could drop someone in an earlier edition, a leader can stand up the dropped PC with a minor action. It is much more difficult to kill or threaten a PC with death then it used to be. To my mind, saying that 4th Edition is flawed in its combat system is like saying your Smart Car is flawed because you cannot go off roading in it. Cutting HP wont make nearly as much a difference as keeping monster levels closer to the PC's. Getting back to your question, I would say that you feel the need to customize or kludge a system because you are not getting the desired end result from the system based on how you wish to be able to use it. But that problem is not unique to any game system or game element. END COMMUNICATION [/QUOTE]

Verification