NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jackelope King" data-source="post: 3823410" data-attributes="member: 31454">Got a time machine? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Seriously, though, if you're prepared to make the claim that OD&D / 1e DMs were more likely to make a "I won't kill PCs" statement, I will be quite surprised.My thanks for the clarification.If I may attempt to sumarize how your view comes across to me:1. Resource attrition / management is of mechanical signficance (a point on which we agree, even if we enjoy it to differing degrees).2. The proposed 4e system changes the resource attrition / management system in such a way that the mechanical significance of resource attrition / management is reduced, if not lost (I disagree with you here, because I feel that the emphasis is instead focused on any given encounter and managing resources within that framework).2a. Specifically, the proposed 4e system increases the reliance on win / lose scenarios beyond what older editions depended upon. (I am uncertain of this, but then again, I tend to run more encounters which you would define as win / lose anyway, simply because the groups I've played with prefer the tactical challenge).2b. An increased number of win / lose encounters will demand that players use their strongest (and presumably per-day) resources early in order to triumph. (I strongly disagree with this, because again, in my experience, players almost invariably use their meat-and-potatoes/bread-and-butter abilities before they're willing to expend rarer resources, even in my games where I tend to use more encounters you'd likely call win / lose).or2c. An increased number of win / lose encounters will have consequences disruptive to gameplay (increased rate of character death for the average group). (Again, I would disagree. Though I rarely kill characters, my group prefers encounters you'd call win / lose, and they've only really been defeated once in a year and a half ongoing M&M game).3. Since PCs will be forced more often to expend their most powerful (per-day) resources quickly just to survive, then the proposed system will not solve the 9-9:15 adventuring day. (My disagreement here is based on my previous disagreement that players naturally lead with their most powerful and valuable resources, which in my experience, they most certainly don't. Instead, they lead with their meat-and-potatoes abilities which, if I'm understanding the previews correctly, will be per-encounter.)Again, if I'm misunderstanding, please correct me.</blockquote>

Verification