Pathfinder 1E Paizo Annoucement!

[hong]

Tell me, did I mention anything about a full-blown plot and climax?

FNARR FNARR

 

[hong]

Apparently not if the players blow their load right from the start.

If the rules conspire against you designing fun and interesting encounters, in which people do fun and interesting things, then you change the rules.

 

[Azzy]

If the DM metagames by hitting e.g. Rope Trick with all his metagame powers, then the players will do the same.

Well, if the players metagame by using rope (and other stupid) tricks, then by your logic, the DM will do the same. Don't mistake the effect for the cause, don't blame the answer for the question.

And really, if the DM has a proper understanding of the encounter guidelines in the DMG, then there's really no reason for this issue beyond the players trying to nova all their kewl powers rather than intelligently manage their resources. The DM shouldn't reward cheesy player habits. Instead, the DM should be upfront that if players make stupid or power-gamery choices then they will reap the consequences of their actions, and that, conversely, good play will be justly rewarded.

 

[Azzy]

If the rules conspire against you designing fun and interesting encounters, in which people do fun and interesting things, then you change the rules.

If the rules do. However, in this case they don't.

 

[hong]

If the rules do. However, in this case they don't.

They most certainly do, for very common values of "fun" and "interesting".

 

[Azzy]

They most certainly do, for very common values of "fun" and "interesting".

Well, considering the rules never inhibited my ability create "fun" and "interesting" encounters for my player, perhaps you're the one doing it wrong. Really, there's nothing in the encounter guidelines in the DMG that inhibit fun or interesting play.

 

[hong]

Well, if the players metagame by using rope (and other stupid) tricks, then by your logic, the DM will do the same. Don't mistake the effect for the cause, don't blame the answer for the question.

Playing the blame game is pointless, when the real solution is to remove the rules quirk that causes such problems in the first place.

And really, if the DM has a proper understanding of the encounter guidelines in the DMG, then there's really no reason for this issue beyond the players trying to nova all their kewl powers rather than intelligently manage their resources. The DM shouldn't reward cheesy player habits. Instead, the DM should be upfront that if players make stupid or power-gamery choices then they will reap the consequences of their actions, and that, conversely, good play will be justly rewarded.

So... "good play" now means ignoring spells whose express purpose is to make it safe to hold up in enemy territory? It now means deliberately holding back your efforts when faced by monsters that want to eat your brane? It now means metagaming so that you don't do your best, because the DM isn't likely to kill you?

 

[hong]

Well, considering the rules never inhibited my ability create "fun" and "interesting" encounters for my player, perhaps you're the one doing it wrong. Really, there's nothing in the encounter guidelines in the DMG that inhibit fun or interesting play.

Yes there is, because it means not using your most spectacular and interesting powers for the purpose of kicking of butt. Which is stupid, when the whole point of having fights in the game is to kick butt. That's not to say that one cannot play a game without opportunities to promulgate violence, but such a game is almost but not quite totally unlike D&D.

 

[Azzy]

Playing the blame game is pointless, when the real solution is to remove the rules quirk that causes such problems in the first place.

Um, you're suggesting a problem where one doesn't exist. If, using the rules as there appear does not stop me and other DMs from creating fun and interesting encounters, the problem then cannot exist in the rules. No, logically, if the rules are apparently not at fault (as they obviously don't impede everyone's ability), then it must be in the ability (or lack thereof) to use those rules properly.

So... "good play" now means ignoring spells whose express purpose is to make it safe to hold up in enemy territory? It now means deliberately holding back your efforts when faced by monsters that want to eat your brane? It now means metagaming so that you don't do your best, because the DM isn't likely to kill you?

Nice, but let me put my own words in my mouth, thank you. "Good play" doesn't involve novaing or refusing to manges one's resources--thus not necessitating the use of rope trick, teleport, or whatever else after each encounter.

 

[Mirtek]

You mean "making early encounters fun and interesting in their own right".

So if encounters are only "fun and interesting in their own right" if the deplete the party's ressourced almost completly, then their will be no change to the 15-minute-day in 4e because an encounter can only be "fun and interesting in it's own right" if it depletes almost all of the party's healing surge (as obviously if you have still plenty of healing surges left the encounter couldn't have been "fun and interesting in it's own right")

They most certainly do, for very common values of "fun" and "interesting".

Sure, that's why 3.x D&D is the least popular RPG ever with the lowest number of players. Hm, wait a moment, there's something wrong with that statement