Search results

The trick would be to scale back the sandbox-y-ness, without the players realizing it. Definitely a subject for another thread, though. An hour probably isn't necessary. But a really solid encounter will probably take at least a half an hour to prepare from scratch (and that's assuming access...

It's not difficult to craft your encounters in such a way that you can be sure you'll use them. Remember, I believe random encounter tables have their place. I just don't think that place is at the core of an entire game's encounter generation process. Rather, they're something you resort to...

As I mentioned, I feel that probably takes up too much time on behalf of the DM. Certainly, it seems more efficient to spend two hours planning two encounters that you know you'll use, than to spend 20 hours planning 20 encounters that you'll only use 10% of. But you certainly can craft...

That's sort of a two-part question. The first being the difference between a crafted encounter and a random encounter. A random encounter is decided upon with a random element (a die roll) from a table populated with predetermined values. The resultant encounter may have some connection to the...

You're welcome to believe that my opinion is unreasonable. But I couched with words like, "I think," and "I believe," so don't pretend that I'm holding my opinions up as gospel truth. Again, quit dragging this off-topic with personal attacks.

I did that. One of the reasons I gave is that I feel that well-crafted encounters are better than random encounters. You can disagree with me. In fact, go for it. I've made an argument and there's plenty of room in there to pick it apart. But don't come at this from the perspective that no one...

This is my thought as well. Random tables take up a comparative ton of space in written form for something that is essentially a bunch of giant formulae. As long as you know the table suits your situation, you don't need the table. You just need the results it spits out for you.

I'm not advocating that someone take the role as DMing when they don't like DMing. What I'm saying is that, as a DM, I've always found it more helpful to focus on what my players find enjoyable, because I find that when they have a good time, I have a good time. Many DMs have a list of things...

I'm sorry that you feel that's what the arguments that I and others in this thread are making boils down to.

I'd go further than this - the DM's responsibility is simply to facilitate an enjoyable play experience for the players. Whether he makes that inherently enjoyable to himself isn't something I would consider a responsibility, and I strongly feel that the more emphasis you place on your role as...

I'm not really asking you anything. I'm telling you that I believe something to be the case. I've presented well-reasoned arguments for why the preference for random tables defining gameplay (rather than simply supporting it when appropriate or convenient) is an abdication of responsibility on...

No, it's the attempt to a) portray consumers as mindless drones, which you apparently believe a significant chunk of the tabletop gaming community is, and b) portray yourself as separate from and above what you call "consumers," both in your professed unwillingness to accept whatever the company...

Everyone does that anyway. That doesn't mean you've eschewed the label of "consumer." You're also trying to define "hobbyist" in a way that suits your argument, rather than the word simply meaning a person who engages in a pursuit or activity for relaxation or leisure. Neither of those words...

And yet Magic is now one of the strongest toy brands in the world - even longtime players agree that right now is a great time to be playing. Clearly, errata isn't responsible for killing games. The number of D&D DMs who go on discussion forums to talk about the game is relatively small. The...

I'm sure they can.

Then don't. The errata and updates are free. Use the second method I suggested. Or don't bother, and make your character with whatever you've got at hand, and don't worry about it until someone brings it up. Again, you're not going to get anywhere with this. Yes, humans are tricky creatures...

Exactly. As I've said many times before, you probably never need to read through the errata if you're playing D&D. Just play the game. And then, if something arises that makes you or one of your players go, "Hm, that seems fishy, I wonder if that was changed after release," then you go and look...

As a DM? Easy. Keep abreast of changes like condition clarifications, DC tables, and skill rules. There's not that much. As a player? Use the Character Builder, and never worry about it, or just do a quick once-over of the existing errata for the powers/feats you've chosen, if any exists. It's...

If you're playing at the same table, this shouldn't be an issue. Simply say, "We're using the original rules as printed in this book," and pass that book around if a rule needs to be double-checked. Maybe if you're playing online it could come up, but that just sounds like a situation where...

Your rule books are not made obsolete. They are fully functional. They allow you to play the game. They do not allow you to play the most up-to-date version of the game by themselves. On the other hand, neither do the rules updates allow you to play the most up-to-date version of the game by...