Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8366750" data-attributes="member: 82106">I'm speaking more to the way things work for the people playing 4e. They don't, or at least I don't, generally say "I need a level 24 encounter." Instead I say "The PCs are hunting Torog in the Deeps, they are getting close, but their Koa-Toa allies have called for help. Can they find the coordinates of a rumored teleportation circle nearby so they can go quickly to the Koa-Toa City and not lose too much time?" These are the thematics of an Epic adventure. Clearly we won't bother to include important elements that are inappropriate in level since they wouldn't form part of the narrative of a challenge, at most they would be footnotes. So, yes, at the time when specific elements may be introduced, the level of those elements, or creating appropriately leveled and described versions, will be important. I, personally, wouldn't start with "well, lets see, level 24 obstacles include drow, bloodstone, chained ones..." and simply brew something and then try to make up some logic for it. In terms of how the game was designed, yes, I'm sure that a lot of the core mechanical architecture of the game wasn't built ON TOP OF any specific fiction. PoL wasn't fully imagined first, nor did they likely decide the fictional range of each type of monster, "Lets see, Storm Giants should be around low-Epic, and then you'd get Cloud Giants at mid-Epic..." I mean, AT SOME POINT that process happened, but probably after the mechanics were put together. OTOH I would not be surprised if something "gosh, capstone dragons aren't working quite right, can we tweak the rules a bit?" happened either, right? Its a game with mature flavor, so they MUST have had some idea what they wanted, fictionally.</blockquote>

Verification