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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 3809615" data-attributes="member: 18280">You will note also, I hope, that we have finally come around to two key points made earlier:*  It is easier to plan a successful game using the attrition model, and hence far more likely to be done well by the average DM. *  The per-encounter model, being focused on balancing encounters "just right", has a far narrower window to create encounters that are "challenging on its own merits without (usually) being too challenging for them to take on".These things are either generally true or generally not true.  If true, then it follows that it is more difficult to create encounters that are "challenging on its own merits without (usually) being too challenging for them to take on" than to create a successful game using the attrition model.It then follows that per-encounter encounters are more likely to be not challenging enough (too easy) or too challenging (TPK, significant chance of character death).We have seen repeatedly on this board (and in other places) the call to abandon any encounters that are not challenging enough.  This is, IMHO, unlikely to change in 4e.The result is that it follows that DMs are more likely to lean toward too challenging than not challenging enough.It in turn follows that any resource attrition in those games will be worth restoring (if possible) because all resources (and possibly more than all) are needed to face the challenges of the game.If this could be any more obvious, it would have to be wearing a clown suit and sitting in your lap.RC</blockquote>

Verification