AsenRG
#FuckWotC #PlayNonDnDGames
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2018
- Messages
- 17,250
- Reaction score
- 22,514
You know, that's an interesting question that you raise.And how do you represent that when the Fighter, Noelopan, is being played by 19yr old Buford T Johnson? You know who has no training, planning, experience or observations, all three of those are absent from his repertoire. What then?
Why do people accept having to learn books with made-up stats/tons of input controls, but are resistant to learning about real world topics that might actually be useful outside of a game, too?
Why do you assume that I'd be using Monster Manual stats for my monsters?Folklore isn't mythology
So you are admitting it is System Mastery. Once Buford memorizes the Monster Manual he will be fine.
There's no substitute for observation and reckoning.
And that's a problem in my book. The Wizard gets to use his abilities in multiple ways out of combat, has whole areas of knowledge you can't access and you need the tactics you developed to have a fighting chance (which, by my estimates, is around 35%).robertsconley said:[...]everything I talked only gives Boog a chance of winning. That is more than the 10% that everybody seems to think it is. I have lost and lost often.
I maintain that in a properly designed system all the other character classes should need tactics in order to have a fighting chance against a Fighter. D&D3.5 utterly fails that test.
FWIW that's the method I use as well.Yup.
For my part, I lay out the world as if existed and what the PC encounter is what they encounter.
In general high HD, high point, high level, etc NPC/Creatures are either living at the apex of the local ecology or a result of a years of experience. Which means they are not common, and there is a lot "noise" associated with their existence. I.e. there is an impact on their immediate environment.