Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5279037" data-attributes="member: 42582">My experience is closer to Doug's than RC's.I remember some of the long threads debating this issue back before 4e was released, and the same issue came up then. My experience playing 4e has borne out my own predictions about how it would play - that the combats are not particularly deadly, provided that they are played well by the players. The challenge, then, consists in playing well. It's a type of collective puzzle-solving endeavour for the players - for any encounter of party level + 4 or less there is a solution (or multiple solutions) available, and the challenge for the players is to identify and deploy that solution as the encounter unfolds at the table.I can fully understand that this type of play may be unappealing to some. But it works very well for my group. We've come over from Rolemaster, and RM also involves this sort of play (because every round melee combat requires the player to call an OB/DB split, and every spell cast involves optimising for effect versus power point cost versus failure chance).Those who prefer games where the tactics are less metagamey, less along the lines of a semi-mathematical optimisation of the party both individually and collectively in the two dimensions of maximising their impact on the combat while keeping themselves safe, are probably less likely to enjoy 4e. I would put games like RuneQuest, and at least some sorts of AD&amp;D and 3E play, in this category.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5279037, member: 42582"] My experience is closer to Doug's than RC's. I remember some of the long threads debating this issue back before 4e was released, and the same issue came up then. My experience playing 4e has borne out my own predictions about how it would play - that the combats are not particularly deadly, [I]provided that[/I] they are played well by the players. The challenge, then, consists in playing well. It's a type of collective puzzle-solving endeavour for the players - for any encounter of party level + 4 or less there is a solution (or multiple solutions) available, and the challenge for the players is to identify and deploy that solution as the encounter unfolds at the table. I can fully understand that this type of play may be unappealing to some. But it works very well for my group. We've come over from Rolemaster, and RM also involves this sort of play (because every round melee combat requires the player to call an OB/DB split, and every spell cast involves optimising for effect versus power point cost versus failure chance). Those who prefer games where the tactics are less metagamey, less along the lines of a semi-mathematical optimisation of the party both individually and collectively in the two dimensions of maximising their impact on the combat while keeping themselves safe, are probably less likely to enjoy 4e. I would put games like RuneQuest, and at least some sorts of AD&D and 3E play, in this category. [/QUOTE]

Verification