Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7198113" data-attributes="member: 996">Over-generalizing and generation-gappy.  I should just ignore it but... Oh-so-true (IMX) & nostalgic -  and oh-so-boring after a while. ;( and 1 turn = 10 min.  And the balance of a turn spent in combat is assumed to be used resting/binding wounds/repairing weapons & armor, etc - ie, a short rest.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  Don't recall exp for exploration, itself.  For killing monsters, certainly, for gaining (and keeping) treasure, certainly.   I think the expectation of scale was more true in 3e & 4e, where it was explicit, in 5e you might use any scale, or no scale at all running 'default TotM' (with 0 support from the rules - that still gets me).  The expectation of mapping was very much still there in 3e, and could be in 5e, it just depends on the group.  In 4e, though, Skill Challenges could be used to abstract the navigation of labyrinths based on dungeoneering & other skills of the PCs, instead of players going through it in exhaustive detail, so it's fair to say mapping was dead that ed.   It's more in a cadence of rests.  In 3e, the few minutes to charge everyone up with a WoCLW, in 4e the 5e minute short rest, in 5e the 1hr short rest. Depends entirely on the DM.  Not expected as a necessary part of attrition, anyway. No exp for treasure.  Exp for 'story awards' (that could be trivial or significant), and, in 4e, for overcoming out-of-combat challenges, that could easily include 'exploration' and 'social encounters' (on the same scale as that for combat encounters).  Varied wildly with ed.  3e called for a lot of prep time if you wanted to challenge an optimized party with equally-optimized monsters & npcs - it could exceed play time, and PC optimization could also sink a lot of prep time.  4e prep was a breeze, you could get by with minutes of prep for a session, but... Sessions could be short, especially in the Encounters program, just an hour or two.   Hrs/level is an interesting metric, though.  In 5e, for instance, it'll vary with level.  It might be only a few hours of play to get from 1st-2nd, while levels in the sweet spot should take a lot longer.  In 4e it'd've been more consistent, since level widths in terms of encounters were fairly consistent, and encounters were mostly limited to meaningful ones that'd take an hour or so to get through.  3e?  Depends on how optimized and deep into rocket-tag the campaign got, and how many hours of table-time 'planning'/prep went into each rocket.It's consciously designed to go either way.  The basic pdf and the PH w/o optional rules can feel very old-school in a lot of ways.  A DM taking to the rulings-not-rules philosophy and running very much in the player-states-action/DM-narrates-results mode of the core resolution system will probably end up slanting the game towards that style, including things like mapping, because players /need/ to keep track of where they've been and what they've tried to succeed in that mode......but it's not gaurantee, and if you turn on the optional rules you invoke more of the WotC era, and, presumably, with players accustomed to that era, will get more of that style.</blockquote>

Verification