Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MerricB" data-source="post: 6238412" data-attributes="member: 3586">I don't think I grumble anywhere enough yet. <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=":)" />The truth is that I enjoy games in a wide range of styles; I really enjoy the AD&D game, but I also really enjoy the 4E and Next games I run. Funnily enough, I didn't really enjoy PF all that much; I wonder how much of my non-enjoyment came from the system, and how much came from the very nature of the Adventure Paths and Paizo's approaches to challenges.(I do play Advanced Squad Leader when I get the chance, though!)One of the biggest challenges that has been facing the designers of D&D over the past few years is that the nature of Adventure Paths (and such scenarios) requires a different underlying system than what D&D began with. When you're in a megadungeon, you can run away. When you reach the final Boss of an AP, the final battle needs to be big, memorable and achievable. And it's a major difference in design style. Great encounters need to be designed, rather than arising organically out of play. And some of the solutions that have been used leave me underwhelmed.(Kyuss at the end of Age of Worms is one such. Play a rogue in that fight. Get frustrated).Cheers!</blockquote>