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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ComradeGnull" data-source="post: 5967515" data-attributes="member: 6685694">I think that's a really good point about the way that 4e was introduced- I think it explains some of the '4e is a boardgame' edition warring.  My first and second impressions of 4e were both bad- first impression because looking through the books it seemed unfamiliar, and second impression because the first game I played was run by someone who chose to focus almost entirely on tactical play and combat.I was looking back at the old 2e PBH and was struck by how detailed the examples of play were, and how many more there are.  4e PBH has one example of play in the intro chapter, but it's basically 'you look around, you make some skill checks, you see some bad guys, ok now combat'.  2e PBH had examples of the back-and-forth between players and DM in combat, actions that skirted the boundary between combat and non-combat interactions, etc.  4e examples, when they crop up, are primarily of how to do the math to correctly calculate defenses, damage, and healing.  The example of play from the DMG focuses on a dialog-driven skill challenge and again is heavily mechanics-driven.The sample play really models how the game is run for people who have either never seen it before, or are uncertain if it is still going to be playable like the game that they like.  DMGs have suggestions for 'you can play like this, or you can play like that', but without an example of what that looks like in practice, novice DM's are likely to still be at sea.</blockquote>

Verification