D&D 4E City vs Country / Humanoids vs Monsters in 4e

[Phasics]

We all have our preferred adventuring locations and preferred enemies. I guess the real question is will 4e be geared towards one or the other more than 3e was ? or would it be the same ?

And by that I mean Humanoids OR Monsters. Are most of the enemies humanoids leaning towards social interaction political intrigue etc or are most of the enemies monstrous where little social interaction is possible (aka the attack on sight).

Similarly with settings are most settings going to be in a city or out in the undeveloped world.

Or will it be totally Dependant on the DM ?


The reason I ask will it be any different between 3e and 4e is because with some fundamental changes happening with the classes/races and overall dogma I'm interested if future campaigns will be geared further towards one type of adventuring or will offer a balance of settings.

Added a poll as a side note as I'm curious which are the more popular adventures.

 

[Irda Ranger]

Your options didn't quite capture my preference.

Wilderness/Humanoid/Magic & Mystery

I use the more monstrous enemies (from Trolls to Beholders) fairly rarely so that they don't lose their "Wow, cool!" factor. I also don't want to infer that my campaign world is over-flowing with non-humanoid monsters. They aren't Greek Legend rare, but my wilderness does not have a cosmopolitan air. Most enemies are humanoids of one sort or another, and I keep it interesting with their social factors (religious wars/cultist plots, Guilds, etc.).

It's only a slight preference though. I've played in and run all the combos of City vs. Wilderness, Humanoid vs. Monstrous, and Intrigue vs. Combat-centric vs. "the Quest", and they're all fun.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I love cities.

I love wildrnesses.

I love monsters.

I occasionally enjoy humanoids.

I use it all, and I also use areas in between, where humanoids are in the wilderness and monsters are in the city.

 

[TerraDave]

THere are so many variations I don't really know what to say but:

other.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Or will it be totally Dependant on the DM ?

Rich Baker will personally come to your house and set fire to your books if your adventures do not take place in a swamp, at night, in late autumn and feature a halfling named Oggie.

 

[Doug McCrae]

No edition of D&D has ever focused on social/political enemies. Few rpgs do. I doubt 4e will be an exception.

 

[CleverNickName]

No edition of D&D has ever focused on social/political enemies. Few rpgs do. I doubt 4e will be an exception.

I was about to say the same thing. Each edition of D&D merely presents the rules for playing the game; boxed campaign settings, adventure modules, and other supplements are a whole 'nother story. Pun intended.

The Dawn of the Emperors boxed set was the first thing that popped into my mind when I read this poll, but that was not a new edition of D&D...it was just a supplement. A really awesome one, IMO.

 

[shilsen]

I'm omni-adventurous. I like all of the things you listed, and a few you didn't, e.g. city-based adventures with mostly monstrous foes and some humanoid enemies, for one. And I'm pretty sure I'll be able to run all of them in 4e.

 

[FreeXenon]

Rich Baker will personally come to your house and set fire to your books if your adventures do not take place in a swamp, at night, in late autumn and feature a halfling named Oggie.

I am soooo screwed.

 

[Evilhalfling]

I thought this thread would be about Urban Planning
I will run a campaign where the humanoids and monsters will be fighting over the new site of a merchant outpost (Red Wizards if possible) because they both want the tax revenue (LOOT) that such an enterprise would create.