Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Balesir" data-source="post: 6112546" data-attributes="member: 27160">That's actually a good point, and shows how everything - from the durations of effects to the nature of what spells do to the way monsters and NPCs are statted up - is removed from measurements that have meaning in the game world but no meaning in the actual play of the game (i.e. in the &quot;real&quot; world). Having game-time durations (rather than &quot;until the end of the encounter&quot; or some such) in practice just means that as GM I have to &quot;turn it off&quot; at some arbitrary point. So it all comes down to whether I think the characters &quot;should&quot; succeed or not, again. With 4e, not only do I not need to make this sort of sour call when I'm GMing, the players can make decisions based on durations that they can rely upon, rather than hoping that my idea of what the characters can do in X &quot;game minutes&quot; is the same (or more generous) than their idea of the same.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Balesir, post: 6112546, member: 27160"] That's actually a good point, and shows how everything - from the durations of effects to the nature of what spells do to the way monsters and NPCs are statted up - is removed from measurements that have meaning in the game world but no meaning in the actual play of the game (i.e. in the "real" world). Having game-time durations (rather than "until the end of the encounter" or some such) [B][I]in practice[/I][/B] just means that as GM I have to "turn it off" at some arbitrary point. So it all comes down to whether I think the characters "should" succeed or not, again. With 4e, not only do I not need to make this sort of sour call when I'm GMing, the players can make decisions based on durations that they can rely upon, rather than hoping that [I]my[/I] idea of what the characters can do in X "game minutes" is the same (or more generous) than [I]their[/I] idea of the same. [/QUOTE]

Verification