Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Perception: We've all gone blind!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="IanArgent" data-source="post: 4282703" data-attributes="member: 21673"><p>I no longer have the time I did in college. I'm working 9-10 hour days (at a job I love, don't get me wrong, and I am well-paid on top of it) plus commute time. This means it is <em>vital</em> to me that the system be built for the "designers". They have no way of knowing what my party is like. But in 4E, they can assume a much smaller range of mechanical variability. This is a Good Thing (tm). When the designers set up a skill challenge, they can set the DC for an average skill check at 13+1/2 level and it will "just work" for the vast majority of groups. Even if no character in the group has training in that skill, they have a roughly 50/50 shot of making the check; without it being a stupidly easy task for a character optimized for the task.</p><p></p><p>That was my epiphany months ago when the skill system rumors first came up. This is the obvious example - but the entire system shows that paradigm. The adventure designer doesn't <em>need</em> to know anything about the party other than their level; and only has to make one assumption - that the party consists of 5 PCs with all 4 roles covered. And even then, the way encounter design is now, a GM can scale the adventure by multiplying the XP "budget" for the encounter by x/5 (where x is the number of PCs in his party); and by encouraging smaller groups to follow the guidelines for a "less than 4" party in the DMG.</p><p></p><p>There's a doubled paradigm in 4E design. "is it fun?" and "Does it decrease the DM's workload?" (which is really a corollary of the first statement specifically for the DM). I don't need help coming up with fluff - I do that in my head every day. Sometimes I even write it down on a PDA that I alway shave with me (a notepad will work too). But turning that fluff into <em>fair</em> mechanics is very hard in 3.5Ed. I've had adventures run out of Dungeon go pear-shaped on my players because the designers made an assumption about my party that was not true at all, and the results were killer.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="IanArgent, post: 4282703, member: 21673"] I no longer have the time I did in college. I'm working 9-10 hour days (at a job I love, don't get me wrong, and I am well-paid on top of it) plus commute time. This means it is [i]vital[/i] to me that the system be built for the "designers". They have no way of knowing what my party is like. But in 4E, they can assume a much smaller range of mechanical variability. This is a Good Thing (tm). When the designers set up a skill challenge, they can set the DC for an average skill check at 13+1/2 level and it will "just work" for the vast majority of groups. Even if no character in the group has training in that skill, they have a roughly 50/50 shot of making the check; without it being a stupidly easy task for a character optimized for the task. That was my epiphany months ago when the skill system rumors first came up. This is the obvious example - but the entire system shows that paradigm. The adventure designer doesn't [i]need[/i] to know anything about the party other than their level; and only has to make one assumption - that the party consists of 5 PCs with all 4 roles covered. And even then, the way encounter design is now, a GM can scale the adventure by multiplying the XP "budget" for the encounter by x/5 (where x is the number of PCs in his party); and by encouraging smaller groups to follow the guidelines for a "less than 4" party in the DMG. There's a doubled paradigm in 4E design. "is it fun?" and "Does it decrease the DM's workload?" (which is really a corollary of the first statement specifically for the DM). I don't need help coming up with fluff - I do that in my head every day. Sometimes I even write it down on a PDA that I alway shave with me (a notepad will work too). But turning that fluff into [i]fair[/i] mechanics is very hard in 3.5Ed. I've had adventures run out of Dungeon go pear-shaped on my players because the designers made an assumption about my party that was not true at all, and the results were killer. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Perception: We've all gone blind!
Top