Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6011540" data-attributes="member: 6696971">I do understand that this is generally the consensus thought regarding the edition.  However, I truly wonder if this stems from a confluence of (i) a lack of conceptualization of the classic "resource attrition" angle within 4e's mechanical framework and (ii) 4e being so potent and consistent at emulating scene-based heroic fantasy/cinema.  Historically, what are the 5 components of exploration and resource attrition gameplay in D&D?ATTRITION OF RESOURCES1 - Tracking the bare essential such as foodstuffs and water.2 - PCs not being able to predictably and reliably rest to replenish daily resources. DANGER/THREATS3 - Environmental exposure including climactic and topographical hazards.4 - Threat of wandering creatures or PCs wandering into hostile territory.MECHANICAL OR EXTRA-MECHANICAL RESOLUTION5 - Leveraging PC meta resources or player ingenuity to navigate toward intended destination.1 and 2 are easily enough handled by 4e.  Its just that the way they manifest within the mechanical interface is different than times past.  In 4e, 1 and 2 would be handled as (i) getting back daily HPs, (ii) getting back Healing Surges, (iii) getting back Daily Powers.  However, 4e has more granularity;  Encounter Powers.  In 4e, if a member of a group, or an entire group, has their ability to take short rests compromised, then their potency within the course of a single combat is diminished dramatically...and suddenly, ignorantly wandering into hostile territory (dangerous animal dens or savage tribes or precipitous falls/hazards) becomes considerably more threatening and thus the prospect more ominous and foreboding.  If you couple that with the inability to take extended rests and the attrition of Healing Surges (by way of combats or failed skill checks within the extended Skill Challenge) and HPs...threatening can turn deadly.  How does/can 4e handle this?  By way of Disease Track mechanics.  It can handle this and does it rather effectively if I may say so.  Further, I think its actually more easily adjudicated (and thus more clear to the PCs what they are facing...and thus explicitly made more dire) than in editions past.3 is made considerably easy by 4e's mechanics.  The hazard system is extraordinarily well done in 4e.  Both climatic and topographical hazards are very easily injected into a session (and improvised as need be).  Further, as part of a large Skill Challenge (and the resources lost by way of failures), the 4e mechanical framework further provokes the sense of imminent danger and the inherent consequences of long-term failure required in Exploration/Resource Attrition gaming.  As far as 4 goes, this one is, as we all know, one of 4e's major strengths.  Instant, compelling, dynamic combat replete with exceedingly easy monster/hazard/terrain creation and usage at a moment's notice.5?  Again, a 4e strong-suit.  Conflict Resolution (the exploration challenge itself) by way of extended Skill Challenge...or multiple Difficult Skill Challenges if the PC's fail...possibly over and over again...until their status within the Disease Track is terminal (no extended or short rests for anyone), their resources (Healing Surges, Dailies, Encounters) depleted with no way to refresh and they are facing the specter of death due to exposure or things with nasty teeth and claws that go bump in the night.  Or they succeed at the Skill Challenge (or one of them at the tail end of multiple failures) and locate their quarry or reach their intended destination.4e can certainly do this.  It does it differently than prior editions (I think I actually prefer it as the mechanical framework for exploration/attrition gameplay as it is cleaner, made more explicit, so the conveyed fiction can be focused on as the delivery-method of the tension, and there is an actual means of conflict resolution - Skill Challenge) but it can do it nonetheless.  I think if people would give it a trial-run (if just for the fun of it), they may find it more than satisfactory for the playstyle.  I think that, because 4e's "refreshable" resources are different (and more layered) than edition's past and because 4e is so extremely good at its consensus "sweet spot" that the possibility of other playstyles gets routinely dismissed out of hand.  Further, poor editing and lack of circumnavigated advice within the PHB and DMG are also likely culprits.</blockquote>

Verification