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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 3768839" data-attributes="member: 710">Sometimes I get th feeling we are discussing to many things at once.If resources were purely encounter (and round) based, there is no need for a 9-9:15 adventuring day. The only reason to rest the group is because you are out of resoruces and the only way to replenish them is resting. If that is no longer the case, the party only rests if it feels like it. Which might mean never.This in turn would obviously lead to other problems (the "boy, do you remember 8 o'clock when we were just 1st level?"), but that's not related to the 9-9:15 business.Now, what will a mixed system lead to, as D&D 4 will apparently be?Well, we will see for certain next year, but what can we guesstimate?It still depends a lot on play style. For some players, being at 80 % of their resources might be enough to get into the next fight. Some might still feel that's to little, so they rest anyway. Well, you can't help them.How will encouners change? There will be less need and less desire for encounters that serve only to "steal" some resources (like hitpoints, cure spells or magic missiles) from the player. Which might lead to more encounters being "tougher" and the average "death risk" being higher, because there is no point in easy encounters (except to allow the players to show off). But it might make it easier to have a flexible flow through each adventure.How will balance change? Well, if spellcasters and fighters are more balanced according to the "per encounter" scheme, they will remain similar power, regardless of how many encounters are thrown on them per day. If the group is out of resources, all of them probably are, so no one is complaining that it's just the spellcasters that are forcing the group to rest.What I think is important to keep in mind is that the designers claim that the system is pretty tightly integrated and builds on each other (which might not be great for those that want to tinker with subsets of the system). If that is the case, the fears and worries we might have have been noticeable by the designers, too, and they designed other subsystems of the game to take these into account. For me, the fun is speculating how they might have pulled it off. But maybe I am overtly optimistic. But every once and then a post, blog entry or article from the designers make me think that the are pretty clever and that my optimismn is justified.</blockquote>

Verification