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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="LurkAway" data-source="post: 5748682" data-attributes="member: 6685059">OOh, being inclined towards "pretend" simulationism, I love topics like this! To prove to my critics that I'm ambivalent about ALL D&D editions, here's my nuanced view for what it's worth:Since 1E, the Undead Lord of Doom would be cloistered in Dungeon Level 5 of the Lord of Doom module for characters level 10-15. So the 10th level PCs would never have to face him until they're ready, because the players know the encounter design convention that the lowest dungeon level is the most difficult and the 'boss' fight is always at the end. In fact, the DM doesn't even purchase the Lord of Doom module until the PCs get to 10th level. Never does the DM buy a 1st level module and use it as is (without increasing encounter challenges) when the PCs are at 10th level.So 4E recognizes what's obvious to most and explicitly takes out of the picture anything that the PCs probably wouldn't encounter anyway pre-4E. It creates a different feel though. It's like standing on a raised platform beyond which are Big Bad Things -- in 3E you see them from the platform, but they rarely come to you until you're ready, in 4E, there are soft padded walls so you can't see them at all. It's definitely not exploration based, and it feels too safe to me.But IME pre-4E wasn't a proper sandbox game either, like Skyrim where you can wander off too far and get crushed by a wooly mammoth at 1st level. 4E is a lot more obvious about it, for better or worse YMMV.Enworld threads make me realize that if D&D ever goes the true sandboxy route, the game system need to provide a sort of 'spidey-sense' to the players to communicate dangers that could/should be obvious in-game but which the players cannot sense due to lack of signals.</blockquote>

Verification