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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="billd91" data-source="post: 5157277" data-attributes="member: 3400">I think before we can take this as a foregone conclusion, or reject the advice to play something else out of hand, you have to take a very hard-nosed look at the players. Will they be satisfied with just making changes to status effects? Or will there then be something else to complain about? Will replacing the status effects with more damage lead to further complaints since that's likely to cause some lost turns due to unconsciousness and/or death?If the game fits most of your players' preferences, then I'd agree that 4e is a fine game for them and would consider making a tweak here or there. But if it turns out what they really want is a game that has different tools for character adversity that depend more on their own narrative permission, then 4e really isn't as good a fit as some other game might be. It's a sad thing for people to think they want to play a particular game that offers them frustrations than seek out a game that's a better fit but they don't yet know about. The reason I think this actually needs to be given serious consideration is because one set of changes never seems to satisfy. One element I've seen in the development of AD&D over the editions is a progressive weakening of certain aspects of the game's challenge environment. Save or die/suck effects have typically gotten weaker over the editions, in each case because they were supposedly "unfun" for the characters suffering them. Yet, each weakening seems to not be enough and defines the new level of "unfun". Will reducing the presence of status effects or modifying them in some other manner be enough for your players?</blockquote>

Verification