Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="small pumpkin man" data-source="post: 4190944" data-attributes="member: 57910">4e has more detailed rules for xp from non-combat than 3.x (Quests). 4e has more rules for non-combat encounters (skill challenges) and nothing stops you from using skills exactly like 3.x. 4e has an entire non-combat magic system, and has put a lot of effort into making it easier for all types of characters to participate in non-combat encounters, the designers have put a lot of effort into making extended non-combat play easier to run for DMs, so it shouldn't be a problem should it?We know they're putting effort into supporting this kind of play in the DMG, considering all 3.x had was skills, which 4e also has, what could possibly be the problem?Go read the "aint it cool news" review. There are suggestions in the DMG for how to handle that kind of thing, and the 4e rules are more unified, partly with the intention of making it easier to do something like that than 3.x. This is a strong point of 4e.There's been lots DM suggestions and help released, the Zeitgeist article, the Quests article, there have been tidbits about the non-combat encounter system, there has been a large push to give all classes out of combat abilities, there has been efforts made to make world building easier (such as allowing for greater ranges in the amounts of magic items available). The percentage of combat information to non-combat information seems about equal to the percentages of text allocated to such things in previous editions to me.This is of course, also ignoring all the fluff they've released, of which there is a lot of, as they seem to be putting a lot more effort into than in 3.x, which mostly was just a watered down version of Greyhawk. Not that this is necessarily a bad thng, but if they didn't care, if they weren't interested in the fluff, they'd just leave it the same.No, you're complaining that they haven't been showcasing things that were already in the 3.x books, and the 2e books, and the BD&D books and most every roleplaying game ever. Why would they showcase that? People already say "I can do that in 3.x" and winge when Wizards actually releases new and interesting out of combat stuff, imagine what they'd do if Wizards attempted to showcase a bunch of stuff right out of the 3.x DMG, which is what your asking. While I realize it wasn't intentional, implying that these things aren't going to be in because they haven't been showcased is the same FUD we've seen before.</blockquote>

Verification