Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ycore Rixle" data-source="post: 4523299" data-attributes="member: 675">I'll go back to my earlier point and say that without a self-consistent world to explore, exploration is not as alive as it was in other editions.Hussar, I agree that a lot of modules in earlier editions of D&amp;D focused on combat. But it seems clear that 4e does focus on combat more than earlier editions did. Just going by page and word count devoted to combat options, equipment list, magic items list, utility spells, animal companions, henchmen, leadership, cohorts, summoning spells, page and word count devoted to skills, page and word count devoted to default setting, page and word count deovted to back story of monsters, tables for getting lost, encountering wandering harlots, types of madness, types of gems, historical interpretations of side effects of herbs, rules for building castles, rules for establishing strongholds, level titles, bards, random dungeon trappings, planar setting information - it is clear that 4e core focuses more on combat than on exploration and other things as compared to earlier editions. I mean, that list took me literally a minute or two to type, off the top of my head - there are probably a zillion other non-combat, exploration things emphasized back in earlier editions moreso than in 4e.Windjammer, great post. I'm in the same boat. 4E is a good game. It's fun. I play it, I DM it, and I enjoy it. 3.5e is also good, and fun, and I play it and DM it. They're just different, and frankly I wish that 4E would have blown 3.5e completely out of the water so I wouldn't have to keep the old ruleset in my head (along with all the other games I play!).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ycore Rixle, post: 4523299, member: 675"] I'll go back to my earlier point and say that without a self-consistent world to explore, exploration is not as alive as it was in other editions. Hussar, I agree that a lot of modules in earlier editions of D&D focused on combat. But it seems clear that 4e does focus on combat more than earlier editions did. Just going by page and word count devoted to combat options, equipment list, magic items list, utility spells, animal companions, henchmen, leadership, cohorts, summoning spells, page and word count devoted to skills, page and word count devoted to default setting, page and word count deovted to back story of monsters, tables for getting lost, encountering wandering harlots, types of madness, types of gems, historical interpretations of side effects of herbs, rules for building castles, rules for establishing strongholds, level titles, bards, random dungeon trappings, planar setting information - it is clear that 4e core focuses more on combat than on exploration and other things as compared to earlier editions. I mean, that list took me literally a minute or two to type, off the top of my head - there are probably a zillion other non-combat, exploration things emphasized back in earlier editions moreso than in 4e. Windjammer, great post. I'm in the same boat. 4E is a good game. It's fun. I play it, I DM it, and I enjoy it. 3.5e is also good, and fun, and I play it and DM it. They're just different, and frankly I wish that 4E would have blown 3.5e completely out of the water so I wouldn't have to keep the old ruleset in my head (along with all the other games I play!). [/QUOTE]

Verification