A different quote from wolfgang

[MoogleEmpMog]

Padding...? Any encounter that takes less than a page is, in my book, padding, and liable to be cut. I only want tactical encounters that will provide me with an interesting scenario to play out. If they're only present to fill the quota of x CR y encounters/day, they won't appear when I GM.

FWIW, I *loved* the 2e Monstrous Compendiums in their loose-leaf binders, too.

 

[rowport]

You know what I'd like? So far, we've got 1-page and 2-page spreads for tactical encounters. I'd like the option of a half-page spread, with two encounters on each page; or maybe even a 1/3-page spread. That should be just enough for a very brief bit of description, a single stat block, and a single element of tactics or terrain.

It would allow for the simple/throwaway encounters to remain simple, yet still gain some use out of the new format, and it eliminate the need for every encounter to have a (perhaps inappropriate) minimal level of complexity.

Mouse-

FWIW, I *loved, loved, loved* the format for running Expedition to Castle Ravenloft. The truth of it is that without the new format, I would almost certainly not have run it at all, as the complexity of the castle is so daunting. I agree with bento that "fewer, more interesting encounters lead to better adventures, while more fights in 20x20 rooms with orcs is just blah." If the new format effectively discourages "simple/throwaway encounters" (as you put it), I am all for it. Frankly, if those encounters are simple enough to not use the new format, GMs can probably throw them in on the fly anyway. And, for myself, I would rather just skip them and use the more interesting encounters that justify the larger format space (either with monster descriptions, or tactics, or terrain, or all of the above).

BTW, I found the tactics to often be the most useful part of the new format, which I suspect some readers might call "filler" or "fluff". With the tactics listed, I needed little thought on how to run even the more complex enemies, but instead just stayed focused on atmosphere, descriptions, etc. and let the battles take care of themselves.

 

[Wycen]

It certainly varies with parties, but what good is the padding if that 1 or 2 pages write up ends in 4 rounds or less of combat?

 

[Varianor Abroad]

Precisely because you can't just say "It's a mess of goblins, fight them," it requires the writer take into account things such as interesting terrain, tactics, and other such features that might otherwise have been reserved only for "boss" fights or climactic moments.

However, isn't it better design to think about these things for any encounter?

 

[Mouseferatu]

However, isn't it better design to think about these things for any encounter?

Better design to think about them, sure. But there are some fights where, after thinking about it, the proper answer is "Don't worry about it."

As I said above, I feel that most encounters can, indeed, benefit from such things. I just also feel that there should be an option for those few encounters that really don't call for 'em.

 

[the Jester]

IMHO Red Hand of Doom had a great format for encounter setup- about halfway between the 'new' and 'old' styles. I think it was just about perfect.

I don't like 'fluffed out' encounters that take up unnecessary amounts of space.