Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="brunswick" data-source="post: 5114047" data-attributes="member: 70189">Echo what many of the rest of ye have said - from what I have read in WOTCs 4th Ed adventures to date, there are far too many combats.&nbsp; I've just started running the Keep on the Shadowfell for 2 separate groups and one group (who are more the &quot;hack n' slash&quot; type) I reckon will enjoy it but the 2nd group (who are almost the polar opposite of a hack n' slash group) I suspect will get bored fast unless I trim the combats somewhat.&nbsp;The DMG gives definitions for various types of players - actors, storytellers, etc., and advises DMs to cater for all their players tastes.&nbsp; Yet, from what I can see, you (WOTC) dont seem to follow this advice and gear your adventures for those that like the combat part of the game.&nbsp;I (and my players) would love to see more Skill Challenges, puzzles, non-combat encounters to balance out the fighting.&nbsp;Something else I dislike - The location and NPC descriptions provided in, for example, KOTS, are very sparse.&nbsp; More attention should be given I think to NPC mannerisms, advice of playing them etc., and more attention should be given to the description of the locations/dungeon rooms within the adventure.&nbsp; I know that, as a DM, I can flesh out the encounter descriptions (and I do) but one of the reasons I bought the module in the first place is based on the assumption that a lot of this work will be done for me.&nbsp; I know you can only put so much into the pages of the module but my first impression on reading KOTS was that it half finished (lacking &quot;detail&quot; and containing some glaring errors).&nbsp; I dont know if it was a conscious decision by the company but it just appeared (to me) that lip service was paid to the role-playing elements and background depth in the adventure, and I felt short changed by its presentation. &nbsp;I have tweaked the adventure and 'fleshed out' the various locations to my taste now but I would have preferred if this had been done (at least in part) for me by the author/WOTC. &nbsp;Bruns.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="brunswick, post: 5114047, member: 70189"] Echo what many of the rest of ye have said - from what I have read in WOTCs 4th Ed adventures to date, there are far too many combats. I've just started running the Keep on the Shadowfell for 2 separate groups and one group (who are more the "hack n' slash" type) I reckon will enjoy it but the 2nd group (who are almost the polar opposite of a hack n' slash group) I suspect will get bored fast unless I trim the combats somewhat. The DMG gives definitions for various types of players - actors, storytellers, etc., and advises DMs to cater for all their players tastes. Yet, from what I can see, you (WOTC) dont seem to follow this advice and gear your adventures for those that like the combat part of the game. I (and my players) would love to see more Skill Challenges, puzzles, non-combat encounters to balance out the fighting. Something else I dislike - The location and NPC descriptions provided in, for example, KOTS, are very sparse. More attention should be given I think to NPC mannerisms, advice of playing them etc., and more attention should be given to the description of the locations/dungeon rooms within the adventure. I know that, as a DM, I can flesh out the encounter descriptions (and I do) but one of the reasons I bought the module in the first place is based on the assumption that a lot of this work will be done for me. I know you can only put so much into the pages of the module but my first impression on reading KOTS was that it half finished (lacking "detail" and containing some glaring errors). I dont know if it was a conscious decision by the company but it just appeared (to me) that lip service was paid to the role-playing elements and background depth in the adventure, and I felt short changed by its presentation. I have tweaked the adventure and 'fleshed out' the various locations to my taste now but I would have preferred if this had been done (at least in part) for me by the author/WOTC. Bruns. [/QUOTE]

Verification