Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Myrhdraak" data-source="post: 7080539" data-attributes="member: 6694190">I am not sure that I would agree, but I think it is all a preference here. I could see a skill challenge for a minor skirmish be resolved with and Athletics group check for all melee fighters and a group Arcana/Religion check for the magic/divine users. Question is what fun is that? If you have a working combat mechanic with powers and HP, why try to replace it with an inferior mechanism? How fun is running 4 of these before the real tactical battle happens? Will it be so well balanced so that 50% of the party resources are now consumed when the final battle happens? I do not think so, and then you will have to compensate with a lot of high level monsters instead which then introduce much more XP and more risk for a battle that will be very long (4 rounds of At-Will powers) as well as more &quot;risky&quot; in the sense that it might be overpowering the PCs.Another argument is why 5th Edition at all have combat encounters as every encounter is built for the 2 rounds encounter length? Why haven't they just taken out combat mechanism completly and are only running skill challenges instead? I think they realized that the 4th Edition strategy of making EVERY battle tactical, consumed to much table time, and there was a need to shorten many of these encounters to give more time for exploration and roleplaying - but not by turning short encounters into skill challenges, but by creating a combat framework that allowed for 2 rounds of average combat length. Sadly at the expense of longer tactical fights. The game could not do both. What I am trying to achieve here is a game that can do both.But if you prefer a few tactical combats and resolve everything else as skill challenges, run with it.<a href="http://web.comhem.se/mwester/DnD/D&amp;D_4.5e_Rules_Changes.pdf" target="_blank">4.5 Edition Conversion Guide</a>/Myrhdraak</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Myrhdraak, post: 7080539, member: 6694190"] I am not sure that I would agree, but I think it is all a preference here. I could see a skill challenge for a minor skirmish be resolved with and Athletics group check for all melee fighters and a group Arcana/Religion check for the magic/divine users. Question is what fun is that? If you have a working combat mechanic with powers and HP, why try to replace it with an inferior mechanism? How fun is running 4 of these before the real tactical battle happens? Will it be so well balanced so that 50% of the party resources are now consumed when the final battle happens? I do not think so, and then you will have to compensate with a lot of high level monsters instead which then introduce much more XP and more risk for a battle that will be very long (4 rounds of At-Will powers) as well as more "risky" in the sense that it might be overpowering the PCs. Another argument is why 5th Edition at all have combat encounters as every encounter is built for the 2 rounds encounter length? Why haven't they just taken out combat mechanism completly and are only running skill challenges instead? I think they realized that the 4th Edition strategy of making EVERY battle tactical, consumed to much table time, and there was a need to shorten many of these encounters to give more time for exploration and roleplaying - but not by turning short encounters into skill challenges, but by creating a combat framework that allowed for 2 rounds of average combat length. Sadly at the expense of longer tactical fights. The game could not do both. What I am trying to achieve here is a game that can do both. But if you prefer a few tactical combats and resolve everything else as skill challenges, run with it. [URL="http://web.comhem.se/mwester/DnD/D&D_4.5e_Rules_Changes.pdf"]4.5 Edition Conversion Guide[/URL] /Myrhdraak [/QUOTE]

Verification