Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 6268975" data-attributes="member: 29398">In all fairness, [MENTION=3400]billd91[/MENTION] this is probably an intentional part of the design this time around.&nbsp; Here's why:Combat grind.In my 1e-style games there always seems to come a period where the defenses have outstripped the offenses.&nbsp; As a result melee combat grinds to a relative standstill and it's up to the casters to make the difference.&nbsp; Eventually this tends to fix itself when the martial PCs concentrate more on claiming offensive treasure for themselves rather than defensive, but there's always a few adventures that get pretty grindy until the balance readjusts.I'm given to understand some of 3e and much of 4e had problems with combat grind.&nbsp; Part of the problem here was that both those systems used much higher h.p. totals both for PCs and for monsters than earlier versions did; yet the base offense didn't really keep up.&nbsp; A longsword, for example, has done d8 base damage (against normal-size foes) since day 1.&nbsp; Fireball has been d6 per level since day 1.&nbsp; To add to the fun using the same examples, 3e (or 2e?) took away d12 damage vs. large for the longsword and capped fireball at 10d6 - meaning the offense is doing *less* damage to creatures that have more h.p. sometimes by a factor of 5.If h.p. numbers are to remain at about 3e-4e levels I have no problem with juicing up the offense (though DoaM is not the way to do it!).&nbsp; My preference, however, would be to sharply reduce h.p. numbers across the board, and leave the offense mostly alone.&nbsp; In any case I can certainly see why they are trying to design some offense back in.Lan-&quot;d12 vs. large for the win!&quot;-efan</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 6268975, member: 29398"] In all fairness, [MENTION=3400]billd91[/MENTION] this is probably an intentional part of the design this time around. Here's why: Combat grind. In my 1e-style games there always seems to come a period where the defenses have outstripped the offenses. As a result melee combat grinds to a relative standstill and it's up to the casters to make the difference. Eventually this tends to fix itself when the martial PCs concentrate more on claiming offensive treasure for themselves rather than defensive, but there's always a few adventures that get pretty grindy until the balance readjusts. I'm given to understand some of 3e and much of 4e had problems with combat grind. Part of the problem here was that both those systems used much higher h.p. totals both for PCs and for monsters than earlier versions did; yet the base offense didn't really keep up. A longsword, for example, has done d8 base damage (against normal-size foes) since day 1. Fireball has been d6 per level since day 1. To add to the fun using the same examples, 3e (or 2e?) took away d12 damage vs. large for the longsword and capped fireball at 10d6 - meaning the offense is doing *less* damage to creatures that have more h.p. sometimes by a factor of 5. If h.p. numbers are to remain at about 3e-4e levels I have no problem with juicing up the offense (though DoaM is not the way to do it!). My preference, however, would be to sharply reduce h.p. numbers across the board, and leave the offense mostly alone. In any case I can certainly see why they are trying to design some offense back in. Lan-"d12 vs. large for the win!"-efan [/QUOTE]

Verification