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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 1922649" data-attributes="member: 177">I don't think you can use published adventures as an indicator of what the norm is for encounter design.  It's been noted in the industry that adventures don't sell well.  That implies that most DMs are writing their own adventures, leaving the published ones as poor indicators of how folks actually play.That aside, there's a major logical error in your design approach.  You say that the rules stipulate adventure design that you don't like.  I think that point is argueable, but let's take it as true for the moment.  Is the best approach then to design a system that stipulates another specific adventure design?I'd suggest that it would be more reasonable to try to rework the system so that there's no stipulation at all.  Rebuild it so that it is robust enough to handle the full range between the D&D you don't like now through how you personally would like to see it, and everythign inbetween.I'll be honest with you - I don't think that much reworking is required.  A set of guidelines for GMs on how to design adventures, how to control proliferation of magic items, and how to pick and choose what feats are allowed in thier games would serve much better than a whole new ruleset.I think this is a case where one should look to the Principle of Least Action for guidance.  Don't do more work than you need to do to achieve the desired result.  Don't write a whole new game when a supplement to a currently popular game will do the trick.</blockquote>

Verification