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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Argyle King" data-source="post: 6067951" data-attributes="member: 58416">...sounds a lot like the sentiment I had toward how (most) 4E fights I had against dragons went.  To be fair, the later books helped to fix it, but it never fully went away.  The first 4E campaign I played to epic ended with Orcus being stomped so badly by the party that the DM deemed it reasonable he'd surrended after my character made an intimidation check.  The last 4E campaign I played to epic (which was last year) ended when the DM decided it wasn't worth dragging out the end battle because the party was winning so overwhelmingly.  Things improved, and the numbers got better, but the end result was more-or-less the same.  note: I'm not picking on 4E.  I'm simply pointing out that some of the same problems* with the ideals behind the game appear to still be there.  Certainly, such things did sometimes occur in other editions as well; it wasn't uncommon for a 3rd Edition fight to end after a well places save-or-die spell.  The unpredictable nature of conflict means that sometimes things will go in unexpected and sometimes one-sided directions.  Still, it seems to me that it happens more frequently among the more recent designs of the game.  The PCs running roughshod over their adversaries too often seems to be par for the course rather than an event born from a lucky roll, unforeseen combination of spells and abilities, and/or a well timed use of an ability or terrain.  *Which may or may not be viewed as problems at all depending upon your preferences and playstyle.</blockquote>

Verification