Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Argyle King" data-source="post: 5960135" data-attributes="member: 58416">In short:How the party approaches an obstacle should depend upon what makes sense at the time and/or what makes sense give the party's resources and what is around them.&nbsp; While I enjoy 4E, I somewhat dislike the method which 4E took to make higher level challenges feel more epic.&nbsp; &quot;It's not just a door!&nbsp; It's a door made of frozen fire which plays evil show tunes when you turn the handle!&quot;&nbsp; That sort of thing is cool when it's unique and adds something to the game and/or the game world.&nbsp; Just throwing it in there because that's the game system's arbitrary way of making a higher level feel like a higher level isn't exactly my cup of tea.Likewise, while I enjoy 3rd Edition, I feel as though too many things are a function of level rather than a function of in-game play and what feels natural given the situation.&nbsp; It's especially noticeable in 3rd because of how sharp the power curve between levels can be.&nbsp; At times, the difference of one or two levels could completely kill a story arc because those one or two levels completely changed the dynamic of how the game worked -not because of what was going on in the game and in the game world, but because of how the system dictated that levels be illustrated with the game mechanics.&nbsp; I'd much prefer an approach which has a better sense of emergent gameplay and makes more of an effort to connect me to what's going on inside the game world rather than putting so much weight on level escalation and what characters of a particular level &quot;should&quot; be doing.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Argyle King, post: 5960135, member: 58416"] In short: How the party approaches an obstacle should depend upon what makes sense at the time and/or what makes sense give the party's resources and what is around them. While I enjoy 4E, I somewhat dislike the method which 4E took to make higher level challenges feel more epic. "It's not just a door! It's a door made of frozen fire which plays evil show tunes when you turn the handle!" That sort of thing is cool when it's unique and adds something to the game and/or the game world. Just throwing it in there because that's the game system's arbitrary way of making a higher level feel like a higher level isn't exactly my cup of tea. Likewise, while I enjoy 3rd Edition, I feel as though too many things are a function of level rather than a function of in-game play and what feels natural given the situation. It's especially noticeable in 3rd because of how sharp the power curve between levels can be. At times, the difference of one or two levels could completely kill a story arc because those one or two levels completely changed the dynamic of how the game worked -not because of what was going on in the game and in the game world, but because of how the system dictated that levels be illustrated with the game mechanics. I'd much prefer an approach which has a better sense of emergent gameplay and makes more of an effort to connect me to what's going on inside the game world rather than putting so much weight on level escalation and what characters of a particular level "should" be doing. [/QUOTE]

Verification