Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Quickleaf" data-source="post: 6052467" data-attributes="member: 20323">Tony, I run a great game of 4e, and I totally get what you're saying here. My point was that folks like you, me, [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] , and others are pretty awesome DMs - we tend to have experience DMing across editions and have been playing around with 4e quite a bit. It's not that 4e CAN'T do these things (eg. quick trivial combats), on the contrary I think the system is quite versatile...it's that the *presentation* of the game tends to pigeon-hole less experienced/adaptive DMs.An example of how combat, say, could be better presented would be for the DMG to provide guidelines like: &quot;Not every combat warrants pulling out minis and a grid, and here is our litmus test for whether or not you should run a combat with minis...&quot; This could be followed with advice about using stealth checks to &quot;minion-ize&quot; enemies, how to challenge the quest rather than the PCs' lives (eg. Alternate combat objectives), ways to adjudicate range/area of effect when in theatre of the mind, etc. For lots of us this seems like basic stuff, but I think itwouldbe invaluable to new DMs.Actually I was thinkingof 1e/2e. I am one of those rare gamers who pretty much went from 2e to 4e and skipped 3e almost entirely. Though I did play a 12th level knight for a few months and my very limited experience with 3e matchs yours - combats took a long time and &quot;grind&quot; was a serious problem.Different frames of reference <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Quickleaf, post: 6052467, member: 20323"] Tony, I run a great game of 4e, and I totally get what you're saying here. My point was that folks like you, me, [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] , and others are pretty awesome DMs - we tend to have experience DMing across editions and have been playing around with 4e quite a bit. It's not that 4e CAN'T do these things (eg. quick trivial combats), on the contrary I think the system is quite versatile...it's that the *presentation* of the game tends to pigeon-hole less experienced/adaptive DMs. An example of how combat, say, could be better presented would be for the DMG to provide guidelines like: "Not every combat warrants pulling out minis and a grid, and here is our litmus test for whether or not you should run a combat with minis..." This could be followed with advice about using stealth checks to "minion-ize" enemies, how to challenge the quest rather than the PCs' lives (eg. Alternate combat objectives), ways to adjudicate range/area of effect when in theatre of the mind, etc. For lots of us this seems like basic stuff, but I think itwouldbe invaluable to new DMs. Actually I was thinkingof 1e/2e. I am one of those rare gamers who pretty much went from 2e to 4e and skipped 3e almost entirely. Though I did play a 12th level knight for a few months and my very limited experience with 3e matchs yours - combats took a long time and "grind" was a serious problem. Different frames of reference ;) [/QUOTE]

Verification