Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="crash_beedo" data-source="post: 4505139" data-attributes="member: 18781">YES.  ABSOLUTELY.  It's part of why you see in the 'grognard' style threads the idea 'challenge the players, not just the characters'.  If the wood the party is passing by is the lair of a dragon or some creature, the players should have the sense (once they read the signs the DM provides) to skirt the woods, hide, sneak, whatever.  They should have the sense to realize that nearby lair is unwinnable for them.The other side of it is that the DM needs to be fair enough to provide the players enough information to make decisions and evaluate the threat.  Dumping a high level fight right on the players with no chance to avoid it whatsoever is fairly churlish, right?A good example of this in 4E is the Level 6 Irontooth fight... although the fight is eminently beatable, it's quite possible for a party to get in over their heads and resort to old school tactics like 'Flee, flee for your lives!' - and it's certainly amenable to groups trying to outthink the situation - draw the kobolds out, for instance, and fight them in the water where shifting is prohibited.Otherwise, 4E could suffer from - when I go into the woods at level 1, everything we fight is level 1-4 encounters - we can beat anything.  When I go into the woods at level 5, everything is a level 5-9 encounter - we can beat it.  (etc etc).  It's like asking why are the town guards suddenly level 15 minions now that we're in paragon tier?It might make sense from 4E's design philosophy, but dagnabbit whippersnappers it was different back in the 70's, I say!  We had 8-tracks and disco and wilderness encounter tables!</blockquote>

Verification