Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="S'mon" data-source="post: 5283456" data-attributes="member: 463">Aha!&nbsp; Very interesting!&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />&nbsp; This brings up an important point.My current 4e sandbox is set in my primary homebrew setting, which within the scope of the campaign is a &quot;Points of Darkness&quot; or &quot;Frontier&quot; type world.&nbsp; There are vast areas of civilisation where combat is very unlikely - the Realm of Man.&nbsp; Then there is the Borderlands - the Frontier, and within/beyond that the Points of Darkness, where adventurers delve and frequent combat is very likely.&nbsp; I fully agree - this approach seems to work great with 4e.But my intention for my next campaign is to run The Wilderlands, which is very much the classic Points of Light world, almost certainly providing some inspiration to the 4e designers.&nbsp; For that matter even the Points are mostly not very bright.&nbsp;&nbsp; In the Wilderlands beyond the PoLs combat is certainly likely, but I certainly agree that 4 fights a day would really threaten Suspension of Disbelief.&nbsp; Eg in 1e AD&amp;D DMG, using the wilderness encounter tables, even the most dangerous areas generated on average less than 1 encounter per day of overland travel (6 checks/day, 1 in 10 per check). That said, I do think the single very tough encounter that really threatens the PCs can work fine in 4e.&nbsp; These have been I think my most enjoyable experiences running &amp; playing 4e.The problem is more the narrow level range of such encounters compared to PC level (roughly Level +3 to +5, I think).&nbsp; Very trivial encounters are often not fun in 4e, and too-tough encounters&nbsp; not fun either, and both for the same reason - they take too long to play out.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="S'mon, post: 5283456, member: 463"] Aha! Very interesting! :D This brings up an important point. My current 4e sandbox is set in my primary homebrew setting, which within the scope of the campaign is a "Points of Darkness" or "Frontier" type world. There are vast areas of civilisation where combat is very unlikely - the Realm of Man. Then there is the Borderlands - the Frontier, and within/beyond that the Points of Darkness, where adventurers delve and frequent combat is very likely. I fully agree - this approach seems to work great with 4e. But my intention for my next campaign is to run The Wilderlands, which is very much the classic Points of Light world, almost certainly providing some inspiration to the 4e designers. For that matter even the Points are mostly not very bright. In the Wilderlands beyond the PoLs combat is certainly likely, but I certainly agree that 4 fights a day would really threaten Suspension of Disbelief. Eg in 1e AD&D DMG, using the wilderness encounter tables, even the most dangerous areas generated on average less than 1 encounter per day of overland travel (6 checks/day, 1 in 10 per check). That said, I do think the single very tough encounter that really threatens the PCs can work fine in 4e. These have been I think my most enjoyable experiences running & playing 4e. The problem is more the narrow level range of such encounters compared to PC level (roughly Level +3 to +5, I think). Very trivial encounters are often not fun in 4e, and too-tough encounters not fun either, and both for the same reason - they take too long to play out. [/QUOTE]

Verification