Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Free Will and Story
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 6144401" data-attributes="member: 48965"><p>People who feel that what the numbers claim is a challenging encounter isn't for their players... People who want to runa a more simulationist game...</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Who said you have to engage them in combat? Now granted the Original situation was one where the DM messed up, but the other situation concerning the army of minions was an example where the PC's (including Jim) had the chance to flee and Jim chose not to... are you saying there should never be encounters that PC's can't beat down?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yet many people don't get a satisfying experience from using the numbers as you claim, so it's not universal... In other words they are nice as <strong>guidelines</strong> but I don't think any DM should auto-magically expect a good play experience just because he follows them slavishly.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Did you really just use the <strong>subjective</strong> "fun" card as a defense? IMO, player entitlement is telling me, as DM I have to design an encounter within the <strong>guidelines</strong> 4e suggests or I'm having badwrongfun. Do I expect you to design your characters in a particular way, say by following suggested builds? If not, why should you have the right to expect me to build encounters a certain way. I'm starting to think this is just one of those differences in playstyle things. You like the predictability and level of challenge the books guidleines provides not everyone finds that as enjoyable for numerous reasons.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Hey you're entitled to your oppinion, I personally think the numbers are only as important as their ability to produce a good gaming session. Different strokes for different folks I guess.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I never said the DM handled the situation well... but even in the above post you seem to be saying a DM should be able to create and use monsters with instakill abilities... so are you saying the DM was wrong because the guidelines should be followed (which seems to be your earlier position)... Or are you saying the DM should be able to use monsters with things like insta-kill abilities if used well?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Here's just one suggestion...Maybe you want to use 4e in a simulationist manner... ironically enough there is some precedent for this since some of the DC's in the game are presented in an objective manner (as opposed to the level appropriate manner you seem to prefer).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Imaro, post: 6144401, member: 48965"] People who feel that what the numbers claim is a challenging encounter isn't for their players... People who want to runa a more simulationist game... Who said you have to engage them in combat? Now granted the Original situation was one where the DM messed up, but the other situation concerning the army of minions was an example where the PC's (including Jim) had the chance to flee and Jim chose not to... are you saying there should never be encounters that PC's can't beat down? Yet many people don't get a satisfying experience from using the numbers as you claim, so it's not universal... In other words they are nice as [B]guidelines[/B] but I don't think any DM should auto-magically expect a good play experience just because he follows them slavishly. Did you really just use the [B]subjective[/B] "fun" card as a defense? IMO, player entitlement is telling me, as DM I have to design an encounter within the [B]guidelines[/B] 4e suggests or I'm having badwrongfun. Do I expect you to design your characters in a particular way, say by following suggested builds? If not, why should you have the right to expect me to build encounters a certain way. I'm starting to think this is just one of those differences in playstyle things. You like the predictability and level of challenge the books guidleines provides not everyone finds that as enjoyable for numerous reasons. Hey you're entitled to your oppinion, I personally think the numbers are only as important as their ability to produce a good gaming session. Different strokes for different folks I guess. I never said the DM handled the situation well... but even in the above post you seem to be saying a DM should be able to create and use monsters with instakill abilities... so are you saying the DM was wrong because the guidelines should be followed (which seems to be your earlier position)... Or are you saying the DM should be able to use monsters with things like insta-kill abilities if used well? Here's just one suggestion...Maybe you want to use 4e in a simulationist manner... ironically enough there is some precedent for this since some of the DC's in the game are presented in an objective manner (as opposed to the level appropriate manner you seem to prefer). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Free Will and Story
Top