Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 5188083" data-attributes="member: 177">Because the presentation of the adventure is edition specific.&nbsp; It is not enough to say, &quot;design an adventure that has these specific qualities&quot;.&nbsp; Any of us GMs can probably do it for ourselves, for either edition, and run it at our table.&nbsp; But a hefty portion of it would never make it into notes - it'd remain in our heads.For publication, at the end there needs to be a real, usable document that contains all of it.&nbsp; The real challenge doesn't lie in the adventure design, but in the expression of that design in each edition.Now, add onto that a bit of game design (not adventure design) philosophy:&nbsp; 4e does not seem to be designed for the DM to have &quot;stats for everything&quot; (for an NPC or otherwise).&nbsp; The intent seems to be that like in much earlier editions, the DM is supposed to handle a lot of stuff with less explicit mechanical support, and be &quot;old school&quot; about it, if you will.But you seem to want mechanical support expressed for that same stuff.&nbsp; See the conflict?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 5188083, member: 177"] Because the presentation of the adventure is edition specific. It is not enough to say, "design an adventure that has these specific qualities". Any of us GMs can probably do it for ourselves, for either edition, and run it at our table. But a hefty portion of it would never make it into notes - it'd remain in our heads. For publication, at the end there needs to be a real, usable document that contains all of it. The real challenge doesn't lie in the adventure design, but in the expression of that design in each edition. Now, add onto that a bit of game design (not adventure design) philosophy: 4e does not seem to be designed for the DM to have "stats for everything" (for an NPC or otherwise). The intent seems to be that like in much earlier editions, the DM is supposed to handle a lot of stuff with less explicit mechanical support, and be "old school" about it, if you will. But you seem to want mechanical support expressed for that same stuff. See the conflict? [/QUOTE]

Verification