Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
In Defense of 4E - a New Campaign Perspective
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 7555699" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p><em></em></p><p><em>Well, I know this is a bit of hyperbole of course, but 60 level 1 monsters is a LEVEL 15 encounter! Even if the PCs totally have the jump on the opposition, get surprise, are at full strength and totally nova, happen to represent the ideal 100% optimized group for this situation, and have a massive terrain advantage, they ARE DEAD. It isn't even worth bothering with the encounter, its 100% lethal. So clearly a 4e DM has little problem mustering the forces required to kill the party. I mean, even TEN level 1 monsters would be a level + 5 encounter for 5 level 1 PCs, barely survivable (maybe only 'hard' with above advantages in place).</em></p><p><em></em></p><p><em>In a more abstract sense, the idea of 'not challenging', given that the basic structure of 4e is still D&D-like, isn't really sustainable. I mean, mechanics still govern what happens in mechanical terms, so even just sticking strictly inside the hard and fast rules the DM can issue a beatdown in a combat by simply making it tough enough (yes, level + 5 is the RECOMMENDED toughest encounter, but that isn't an inviolable hard rule like how many actions you get in a combat round is). Anyway, the DM could simply issue 3 level + 5 combats in a row for that matter. </em></p><p><em></em></p><p><em>The point is, its really up to the participants to define a lethality level. I think it is reasonable to say that 4e was designed with the idea in mind that the heroic PCs would face danger, sometimes enough to kill them with bad luck or poor play, but that they wouldn't face no-win situations and insta-ganks, which can easily come up just by rolling for wandering monsters in AD&D (for example). </em></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>What I saw more was the sheer volume of detail that was required to be integrated into the character build. Where in 5e you pick a class, and then a 'build' (later on usually) and make SOME other choices (background and race mainly) and then just a few simply choices from then on (spells would be the big one if you are a caster) in 4e your build was the holistic result of dozens, and eventually 100s of choices. Understanding exactly what your PC was, and how it worked could be challenging for many. It was possible to create many builds which were not actually difficult in terms of number of choices in play, but they ALL had a lot of choices in build time.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 7555699, member: 82106"] [I] Well, I know this is a bit of hyperbole of course, but 60 level 1 monsters is a LEVEL 15 encounter! Even if the PCs totally have the jump on the opposition, get surprise, are at full strength and totally nova, happen to represent the ideal 100% optimized group for this situation, and have a massive terrain advantage, they ARE DEAD. It isn't even worth bothering with the encounter, its 100% lethal. So clearly a 4e DM has little problem mustering the forces required to kill the party. I mean, even TEN level 1 monsters would be a level + 5 encounter for 5 level 1 PCs, barely survivable (maybe only 'hard' with above advantages in place). In a more abstract sense, the idea of 'not challenging', given that the basic structure of 4e is still D&D-like, isn't really sustainable. I mean, mechanics still govern what happens in mechanical terms, so even just sticking strictly inside the hard and fast rules the DM can issue a beatdown in a combat by simply making it tough enough (yes, level + 5 is the RECOMMENDED toughest encounter, but that isn't an inviolable hard rule like how many actions you get in a combat round is). Anyway, the DM could simply issue 3 level + 5 combats in a row for that matter. The point is, its really up to the participants to define a lethality level. I think it is reasonable to say that 4e was designed with the idea in mind that the heroic PCs would face danger, sometimes enough to kill them with bad luck or poor play, but that they wouldn't face no-win situations and insta-ganks, which can easily come up just by rolling for wandering monsters in AD&D (for example). [/I] What I saw more was the sheer volume of detail that was required to be integrated into the character build. Where in 5e you pick a class, and then a 'build' (later on usually) and make SOME other choices (background and race mainly) and then just a few simply choices from then on (spells would be the big one if you are a caster) in 4e your build was the holistic result of dozens, and eventually 100s of choices. Understanding exactly what your PC was, and how it worked could be challenging for many. It was possible to create many builds which were not actually difficult in terms of number of choices in play, but they ALL had a lot of choices in build time. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
In Defense of 4E - a New Campaign Perspective
Top