Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dausuul" data-source="post: 5693215" data-attributes="member: 58197">Two things.Number one, I use the "big showy set piece" battles almost exclusively when running 4E and it works fine. Of course a typical adventuring day has 2-3 of these battles rather than the 4 that was expected in 3E, but since that can be a solid three hours of combat, I don't regard this as a problem.Number two, please point me at the guidelines for designing a level-1 to level encounter in 4E, using standard monsters, that either a) appears dangerous enough to create tension for experienced players, or b) does not take 30-40 minutes to resolve. My experience with 4E is that trying to build adventures 3E-style with lots of little fights is a disaster, but building them 4E-style with a few big fights works out very well. So that's what I do. It may be there's some key to making the 3E approach work in 4E that I'm not seeing, but I can attest that the "few big fights" approach is quite viable. I can also attest that if there is a way to make the 3E approach work, Wizards did not grasp it in their early 4E modules, because those modules were a tedious slog--a handful of exciting fights like Irontooth, swamped in a sea of "Oh, look, drakes. Guess we'll beat on them for a while. They're dead now? Huh. Next room then. Oh, look, ooze."</blockquote>