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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5768023" data-attributes="member: 42582">These aren't bad (at least in my view) because they don't involve peripheral encounters with gate guards. They're bad because the actual encounters they present are failures - little thematic content, little integration with player interest as expressed via their PCs, etc.He did say it's a "crashing bore for most participants" (DMG p 92). He also said that equipping the PCs "should be done before play begins, for it is time consuming, and the readying of a party can require several hours if there are more than six characters involved" (PHB p 107). As I read it (and I've reread it to try and ensure against misreading) this is both (i) a diagnosis of a particular playstyle as unfun, and (ii) an instruction to leave something out. No RPing through 6 hour shopping trips at the 1st ed AD&D by-the-book table!I'm not objecting to his advice (at least with respect to Monty Haul - personally, I follow it, but I've known groups who didn't and who nevertheless have fun). I'm trying to rebut the contention (express or implied by some (many?) of the critics of Wyatt's advice) that the 4e DMG somehow crosses a new line in D&D by trying to prescribe a playstyle based on a conception of what makes for a fun game.I'll let you start that thread, but am happy to participate - I have some views! (And I think there are very interesting differences between Moldvay Basic, which I started with, and Gygaxian/Pulsipherian AD&D.)But I'm not here trying to critique Gygax. I'm just pointing out that he did the same thing as Wyatt does, and hence that giving playstyle advice and prescriptions is not new to 4e.</blockquote>

Verification