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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="El Mahdi" data-source="post: 5470906" data-attributes="member: 59506">Yeah, I don't get it either.  An adventure is an Adventure is an Adventure...<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/erm.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":erm:" title="Erm    :erm:" data-shortname=":erm:" />   I'm not sure what you mean by adjusting for "fiction-first", but whatever reason you're adjusting them for, DC's are incredibly easy to adjust to the feel you want.  I'm assuming your using 3.x, and assuming you have a very good grasp of 3.x mechanics and "Feel"...which means I can assume you know how various DC's apply as pertains to your adventures and play group.  So I'm just not seeing it - especially when you say you easily convert 1E and 2E adventures on the fly. 1E and 2E adventures don't have DC's in the first place, so if you're playing 3E, you have to come up with them whole cloth - or simply ignoring them when converting 3E to 1E/2E.  At least 4E is the same basic D20 mechanic, and has a lot more in common mechanically with 3E than 1E/2E...so how are 4E DC's so much more difficult or different to convert, and if you still feel they are, why can't you just do the same thing as when converting a 1E/2E adventure - make them up whole cloth...?  It seems that as far as DC's are concerned, converting 1E, 2E, or 4E adventures to 3E is, at the worst, exactly the same process and difficulty... And are you actually going to say that you find it harder to apply a suitable DC for a 3.x group, than to convert 1E/2E Thac0's to 3E AC/Defense (or vice/versa)...?  That sounds counterintuitive to me...  Why?!?  Unless a monster in the 4E Adventure is a critical part of the adventure's story...in which case I assume you've already read through the adventure in order to have an useable grasp of it's progression/story/plot...then whatever you want the monsters to do, you can have them do.  It doesn't matter.  As long as they are level appropriate, and don't have abilities that your group can't counter or deal with, I don't see the problem.  And you already have to insert 3E math anyway - whether 1E, 2E (so they are a properly leveled threat for your group) - so how is this any different for 4E? If your meaning is that 4E monsters have different "abilities" than their 1E/2E/3E counterparts, then I don't understand the problem as those pertinent abilities are listed in the 4E stat block.  If you already know the monster in 3E, then all you simply have to do is just play it as the 3E version (or 1E, 2E, etc.).  And again, if one of the 4E monsters abilities are crucial to the adventures plot/progression, then you already know this from overviewing the adventure, and can simply add it in. I'm not seeing how this is a problem either...  If you're talking about mini-less combat, how is converting a 4E adventure any different from the other editions.  They were all set up to be used with miniatures - and if you don't want miniatures, all you have to do is ignore the miniatures combat portions. As for Ranges or areas, it's all just a matter of simple conversions, as almost all of those editions used a slightly different system.  All that's needed is to make a basic conversion, regardless of source edition and edition being played in. 1E used inches (with 1"= 5'), 2E used squares (with 1 square = 5'), 3E used feet (with 5' = 1 square), and 4E went back to squares (the 2e system). I've played in 1E, 2E, and 3E - and since my very first game, every group I've played with or DM'd has used grid based combat.  And all three systems rules supported this.  Looking over 4E's rules I don't see any significant change from this...<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/erm.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":erm:" title="Erm    :erm:" data-shortname=":erm:" />  Now this part I understand and agree with...but it's the only one.  4E adventures are written with a different encounter design assumption than previous editions, independent of mechanical differences.  Such as it's not simply a room by room type thing, as it's more of the entire area type of thing.  But, in actual play...whether 1E, 2E, or 3E...every group and DM I've ever played with took this into account anyways.  Whether encounters were designed this way or not, we expected our actions to not simply be limited to affecting only the room as written (i.e.: monsters in other rooms might hear you and come looking for you, rather than wait for you to come to them)...  YMMV on this, but for me it's a non-issue.  Simple - just swap in the other editions equivalent or drop in something level appropriate for the system your using.  The same thing you'd have to do if converting a 1E or 2E adventure to 3E, or a 3E adventure to 1E or 2E... Again, not seeing the problem.  Agreed.  But the way encounters play is mostly determined by the mechanics one is using (the system you're playing in), and completely dependent upon how the DM presents the encounter...both factors that are independent of the source system the adventure is from. So again, not seeing how 4E is any different in this regard. I use adventures from not just 1E, 2E, 3E, and 4E...but I also use adventures from completely different game systems (Palladium, Cortex, Dragonlance SAGA, etc.), and I've found that for the most part - an Adventure is an Adventure is an Adventure.  So... <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/ponder.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":hmm:" title="Hmmm    :hmm:" data-shortname=":hmm:" />  And since ones opinion is completely and wholly subjective, this observation is 100% valid, and one I also hold (for the most part). For me, I also agree that 4E is D&D.  And I think we're saying basically the same thing when I say that 4E doesn't provide the experience I desire.  I still associate it with D&D, it just doesn't play the way I want D&D to play.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />   Charlemagne was too Frank for my tastes... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /></blockquote>

Verification