Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mallus" data-source="post: 3767206" data-attributes="member: 3887">The first part's hard to argue with, but the second I have to disagree with, mainly because I've been playing/running campaigns over the past several years that reduced the role of that kind of resource management without any ill effects. In fact, there have only been positive effects (what we've lost in operational planning, we've more than made in memorable cinematic wahaoo-use).So color me skeptical about the overall deleterious effects of reducing the role of operational-level resource management. I just haven't seen them practice. Why? I know that a focus on resource management over time has traditionally been a part of the game, but so was restrictive multiclassing, and 3E got rid of that to much rejoicing (for the most part).Don't you have to demonstrate that it 4E won't be able to offer a reasonable level of player challenge under a per-encounter model for you to assert that that the 'play experience' will be damaged. That, simply put, that model won't work? And seeing as it does work, well, in fact, under a modified d20 engine in the case of M&amp;M, isn't that a little tough to demonstrate?&nbsp; Why not, exactly? I've toyed with the idea of switching my 3.5e campaign to M&amp;M2e, and the only reason I haven't is sheer laziness. I don't think M&amp;M would do dungeon crawls very well, unless you limited most at-will abilities, but I don't use many dungeons, and more modeling the wider world of 'adventure stories', M&amp;M seems to me like a fine choice.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mallus, post: 3767206, member: 3887"] The first part's hard to argue with, but the second I have to disagree with, mainly because I've been playing/running campaigns over the past several years that reduced the role of that kind of resource management without any ill effects. In fact, there have only been positive effects (what we've lost in operational planning, we've more than made in memorable cinematic wahaoo-use). So color me skeptical about the overall deleterious effects of reducing the role of operational-level resource management. I just haven't seen them practice. Why? I know that a focus on resource management over time has traditionally been a part of the game, but so was restrictive multiclassing, and 3E got rid of that to much rejoicing (for the most part). Don't you have to demonstrate that it 4E [i]won't[/i] be able to offer a reasonable level of player challenge under a per-encounter model for you to assert that that the 'play experience' will be damaged. That, simply put, that model won't work? And seeing as it does work, well, in fact, under a modified d20 engine in the case of M&M, isn't that a little tough to demonstrate? Why not, exactly? I've toyed with the idea of switching my 3.5e campaign to M&M2e, and the only reason I haven't is sheer laziness. I don't think M&M would do dungeon crawls very well, unless you limited most at-will abilities, but I don't use many dungeons, and more modeling the wider world of 'adventure stories', M&M seems to me like a fine choice. [/QUOTE]

Verification