Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
4E is too video-gamey
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RigaMortus2" data-source="post: 4108992" data-attributes="member: 11586"><p>Which is why I tend to save it for more meaningful encounters. The PCs aren't going to know the pattern upfront, it may take them awhile to figure out.</p><p></p><p>Just to be clear, the "pattern" is just one way to defeat the encounter. Figuring it out makes the encounter a little easier. I see it as a good thing, because it is like figuring out a puzzle.</p><p></p><p>With the Gnoll Strangler, I would agree. If you use the same pattern for standard creatures over and over again, it becomes easier.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>With the plant encounter (for example), it only had a few defenses at it's disposal. Really, it was more like an obstacle than a creature, because it was stationary. However, there was a random aspect to it, since I would randomly roll for the attack each round. Everything else for that encounter is something that you would normally do anyway. Giving a hint as to what the NPC might do is something DMs do anyway. In fact, they have a skill for that. Spellcraft will tell the player what spell is being cast. And knowning the attack type is also something players would know. If you figure out an enemy likes to cast Burning Hands (similiar attack that the plant creature had), you'll know to spread out and stay more than 15 feet away from either the enemy or your allies, so when the attack does occur, he isn't nailing everyone.</p><p></p><p>In addition to that, just because you can figure out a pattern doesn't mean you'll be in a position to do anything about it. If you know someone is going to do a certain type of attack, and you can't position yourself favorably because of the terrain or the size of the room or ally/enemy placement, there isn't much you can do about it.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That role is never taken away from the DM. But it depends on how drastically the changes are. In the Maedar encounter, had the party used high level magic to teleport the Maedar to the Astral Plane, that pretty much would have ended the encounter, and they would have won w/o figuring out any apparent pattern.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You make it sound like just because a DM designs an encounter with a hidden pattern to it, that he is somehow incapable of changing it on the fly or is now limited to changing it up. This isn't the case at all. I see a pattern as a tool. Just one possibility of defeating an encounter. It's kinda like saying, "If I were one of the players, this is what I would do in this situation to win the encounter" and then you build off of that. As a DM, I find it interesting to see if the players can figure out your puzzles/patterns, and if they would do it the same way you would.</p><p></p><p>And I have to reiterate, I personally would not set up every encounter with a 'pattern' to it. Just meaningful ones. 4E seems to have these pre-built into each NPC in the MM.</p><p></p><p>The other question you asked is "Does it make the encounter easier?" Yes, because that is the purpose of it. Why is that such a BAD THING(TM)? Think of a pattern for an encounter just like you would a puzzle you present your players. If the only way to open the magic door is to answer a riddle, and the players answer the riddle and the door opens, you shouldn't think to yourself "Damn, they figured out the riddle, that made it too easy for them to get through the door." With a combat encounter, figuring out the pattern is just HALF the equation. You still have to roll the dice and defeat the encounter. You just have a little more knowledge than you did pre-encounter.</p><p></p><p>Do you not use Knowledge skills? If I use Knowledge Dungeoneering to find the weakness to an Abberation, does that not make the encounter a little easier? And that just involved a skill roll, whereas a pattern for a combat encounter involved the players using their brains to figure it out (or even realize that there is a pattern at all).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RigaMortus2, post: 4108992, member: 11586"] Which is why I tend to save it for more meaningful encounters. The PCs aren't going to know the pattern upfront, it may take them awhile to figure out. Just to be clear, the "pattern" is just one way to defeat the encounter. Figuring it out makes the encounter a little easier. I see it as a good thing, because it is like figuring out a puzzle. With the Gnoll Strangler, I would agree. If you use the same pattern for standard creatures over and over again, it becomes easier. With the plant encounter (for example), it only had a few defenses at it's disposal. Really, it was more like an obstacle than a creature, because it was stationary. However, there was a random aspect to it, since I would randomly roll for the attack each round. Everything else for that encounter is something that you would normally do anyway. Giving a hint as to what the NPC might do is something DMs do anyway. In fact, they have a skill for that. Spellcraft will tell the player what spell is being cast. And knowning the attack type is also something players would know. If you figure out an enemy likes to cast Burning Hands (similiar attack that the plant creature had), you'll know to spread out and stay more than 15 feet away from either the enemy or your allies, so when the attack does occur, he isn't nailing everyone. In addition to that, just because you can figure out a pattern doesn't mean you'll be in a position to do anything about it. If you know someone is going to do a certain type of attack, and you can't position yourself favorably because of the terrain or the size of the room or ally/enemy placement, there isn't much you can do about it. That role is never taken away from the DM. But it depends on how drastically the changes are. In the Maedar encounter, had the party used high level magic to teleport the Maedar to the Astral Plane, that pretty much would have ended the encounter, and they would have won w/o figuring out any apparent pattern. You make it sound like just because a DM designs an encounter with a hidden pattern to it, that he is somehow incapable of changing it on the fly or is now limited to changing it up. This isn't the case at all. I see a pattern as a tool. Just one possibility of defeating an encounter. It's kinda like saying, "If I were one of the players, this is what I would do in this situation to win the encounter" and then you build off of that. As a DM, I find it interesting to see if the players can figure out your puzzles/patterns, and if they would do it the same way you would. And I have to reiterate, I personally would not set up every encounter with a 'pattern' to it. Just meaningful ones. 4E seems to have these pre-built into each NPC in the MM. The other question you asked is "Does it make the encounter easier?" Yes, because that is the purpose of it. Why is that such a BAD THING(TM)? Think of a pattern for an encounter just like you would a puzzle you present your players. If the only way to open the magic door is to answer a riddle, and the players answer the riddle and the door opens, you shouldn't think to yourself "Damn, they figured out the riddle, that made it too easy for them to get through the door." With a combat encounter, figuring out the pattern is just HALF the equation. You still have to roll the dice and defeat the encounter. You just have a little more knowledge than you did pre-encounter. Do you not use Knowledge skills? If I use Knowledge Dungeoneering to find the weakness to an Abberation, does that not make the encounter a little easier? And that just involved a skill roll, whereas a pattern for a combat encounter involved the players using their brains to figure it out (or even realize that there is a pattern at all). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
4E is too video-gamey
Top