Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="timbannock" data-source="post: 4609736" data-attributes="member: 17913">Not sure if you'll even read another post quoting this line you wrote, but here goes:I've run several 4e encounters that were completely off-the-cuff, during my group's playtest of the 4e rules.&nbsp; What was amazing about 4e was how easy I could pull up 2-4 monster stat blocks, peruse them for about a minute total (if that), and feel comfortable to run through a fight.Often with special terrain and other effects going on.Again, that was during my playtest...I barely knew the rules at all.In 3.5e (and 3.0, and 2nd Edition), I ran several dozen (probably much more, in fact) off-the-cuff encounters.&nbsp; I found only 2e to be nearly as easy 4e, and those were a lot LESS interesting fights.To further illustrate, a vast majority of the encounters in the published 4e adventures from WOTC and Goodman Games include encounters that &quot;interact&quot; in a lot of ways: interactive terrain, several encounters that can trigger each other due to vicinity, encounters that can be avoided with skill challenges, roleplaying or other means, etc.In fact, once again, 4e seems quite a bit more advanced in encounter design that pretty much any edition before it.&nbsp; Partly due to the pre-planning of the published adventures, and partly due to the copious amounts of advice for winging it in the DMG.Therefore, I feel that your comment is either being misinterpreted by myself (in which case I apologize), or it is not taking into account the actual information that is available...perhaps you don't have access to this information?&nbsp; If not, I'd suggest checking out the DMG, because it's pretty amazing how much encounter building advice is in there!Edit - worth noting that, like you, I am much more story-oriented than minis and rules-lawyering.&nbsp; But the point of a lot of 4e rules is to know when to use them to help propel the story, and when to wing it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="timbannock, post: 4609736, member: 17913"] Not sure if you'll even read another post quoting this line you wrote, but here goes: I've run several 4e encounters that were completely off-the-cuff, during my group's playtest of the 4e rules. What was amazing about 4e was how easy I could pull up 2-4 monster stat blocks, peruse them for about a minute total (if that), and feel comfortable to run through a fight. Often with special terrain and other effects going on. Again, that was during my playtest...I barely knew the rules at all. In 3.5e (and 3.0, and 2nd Edition), I ran several dozen (probably much more, in fact) off-the-cuff encounters. I found only 2e to be nearly as easy 4e, and those were a lot LESS interesting fights. To further illustrate, a vast majority of the encounters in the published 4e adventures from WOTC and Goodman Games include encounters that "interact" in a lot of ways: interactive terrain, several encounters that can trigger each other due to vicinity, encounters that can be avoided with skill challenges, roleplaying or other means, etc. In fact, once again, 4e seems quite a bit more advanced in encounter design that pretty much any edition before it. Partly due to the pre-planning of the published adventures, and partly due to the copious amounts of advice for winging it in the DMG. Therefore, I feel that your comment is either being misinterpreted by myself (in which case I apologize), or it is not taking into account the actual information that is available...perhaps you don't have access to this information? If not, I'd suggest checking out the DMG, because it's pretty amazing how much encounter building advice is in there! Edit - worth noting that, like you, I am much more story-oriented than minis and rules-lawyering. But the point of a lot of 4e rules is to know when to use them to help propel the story, and when to wing it. [/QUOTE]

Verification