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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 4522364" data-attributes="member: 710">Some people say that D&D 4 is not really suited to what one might call "operational" play or "strategic" play. I am not sure if I've really nailed down what it means, but the basic idea of this kind of play is that you have to manage your resources on a long-term basis. Characters avoid combats if they can, typically because it's too dangerous and costs to many resources.Generally, D&D has a negative aspect in this regard: Avoiding combat means avoiding XP. You don't really want to do that, because gaining XP and levels is the major "carot on a stick" to motivate the players (at least on the purely mechanical side). The key elements in 4E that still support a modicum of operation play are aspects like "daily powers" and "healing surges". While encounter powers keep you fresh, if you're out of dailies or surges, fights will become more dangerous since you don't have the chance to avoid combat. Healing Surges are particularly crucial. Succesful operation play means you don't expend a lot of dailies or healing surges. If you do, your consequence of failure is either a deadly combat or an earlier retreat. The motivation to go on longer are milestones (from a purely mechanical point of view).So, the interesting question is - how can we reward succesful strategic play along these ideas better.My idea is based around the XP "Budget" concept. Each encounter has an XP budget that defines its level. Mix monsters till you have achieved the budget for the level you set yourself.My idea is now to assume that the entire area or adventure of operation play has a XP budget. Note: Regardless how you "beat" the adventure/area, you get the same XP. but if you're clever about it, you get it easier. It gets easier because you give the PCs the ability to "shift" XP around. For example, the PCs might notice a group of Ogre Guards (5, maybe?)."Hack & Slash" approach would be just to charge then and see who's left standing.Clever Strategy might be an attempt of the PCs to lure the Ogres into an ambush, split them up, or pass them. The way to "implement" this is to create a skill challenge. The players might want to set up an ambush. They have to specific about what they want to achieve - just attack at night, or do something more complex. Let's say they want to create a concealed trap into which the Ogers might fall. Based on the results of the skill challenge and the player description of their plan the DM then decides on the effectiveness on the trap. Let's say the description of the players suggests a concealed pit trap that the Ogers might fall into. If they succeed the challenge (combining checks to build the trap - Maybe Dungeoneering or Nature - with checks to lure the Ogers into it - Bluff, Stealth, Perception?). the Ogres will walk into the ambush, with two Ogres dropping into the trap - effectively out of the fight. The PCs now have just to face three Ogers instead of two (and the three remaining ones are also surprised!). The PCs gain XP for the 3 Ogers and for a skill challenge of a complexity equal to the remaining 2 Ogres XP. If the PCs had failed the challenge, the Ogers might not have fallen into the trap (but the pit would still be there, so it could affect the encounter).The PCs could have also decided to avoid the Ogers entirely. This would have resulted in a higher complexity challenge. An entirely different idea might be that the PCs would have gone back to the city they came from and required additional forces - with a succesful social skill challenge, they might have been able to acquire 4 Guard Minions and a Guard Leader that would aid them against the Ogres. They would have still fought 5 Ogres, but they had support that might match two of the Ogres.This idea, of course, is not a hard rule. It's just a guideline. You might want to adapt and change it. For some fans of operational play, skill challenges might just be exchanged with a convincing description of the PCs plan and execution. A further variation I'd build in: I would not always use skill challenge DCs as determined by the PCs level. Sometimes I think it's okay to use a higher or lower level challenge - for example, if the party is level 5, and would have to fight against 5 level 9 Ogres (I don't know the actual level of Ogres, but let's pretend there were level 9 ones), you might have used a complexity 2 level 9 challenge for the trap. So, what's the reward for the Players if the XP stays the same? The reward is basically that the actual combat encounter (if it still happens) is easier. It also means it will cost them less resources. If we'd really set up a scenario with 5 level 5 PCs against 5 level 9 Ogres, this should be pretty tough, cost a lot of healing surges and dailies and maybe a PCs life. If we reduce it to 3 level 9 Ogres, things look easier, and it might just cost a few healing surges and encounter powers. In addition - since you have split up the encounter in "setting up the ambush" (skill challenge) and "kill the ogers" (combat), the PCs have beaten two encounters and get an action point.Aside from skill challenges, Quest XP might also result in similar rewards. For example, if the PCs manage to rescue an imprisoned warrior, he might thankfully join them for the upcoming encounters.</blockquote>

Verification