Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MrMyth" data-source="post: 5429597" data-attributes="member: 61155">This is the section on the fundamental elements that the game consists of, and it gives exploration the most overall detail in those pages. How is that skipping past it or saying it in passing?  Again, feel free to show me some quotes from the rules. But I'm not seeing them in there.   Whoa, that wasn't the part of the quote I was critiquing. You said the rules suggest to "simply summarize what happens between the encounters." It is that last part which isn't in there. Instead, it tells us to describe what happens between encounters, let the players choose what they want to do and how they want to do it, and then the DM figures out what that involves or how to resolve their plans.  Again, there is nothing in the 4E rules which suggests that the DM should fast-forward past events between encounters. We have direct quotes which suggest otherwise.   Again, I think you are misreading the text. It doesn't recommend just sticking to the important parts. It simply recommends not obsessing over the mundane. Do you really not see the difference? Look, I enjoy games that don't feature non-stop combat. Players unravelling a mystery in town, chatting over clues by the campfire, trying not to piss off townsfolk, discovering ancient ruins in the wild - all those are interesting things which don't have to involve a single dice roll.  Having someone spend 30 minutes describing how they cook dinner? Spending that long having the DM describe how uneventful things are throughout the night? That isn't my idea of an especially entertaining scenario.  Maybe it is for others, maybe not. But you are suggesting that the only options we have are either that level of obsession over detail or we don't bother with 'exploration' or 'adventure' and just fast-forward to all the combat. And that is absurd. There is a vast spectrum of styles of play between those two levels, many of which involve all sorts of rich and rewarding roleplaying.  The only style that 4E advices against is one of the absolute extremes, and even then, says you can indulge in it if the group enjoys that approach.   Again, you are reading stuff into the text that isn't there. It never suggests to skip from one encounter to the next. All it suggests is to bypass specific mundane details.  I'm not arguing that "teleporting from fight to fight" is an excellent style of play. I'm sure some like it, and some don't. What I'm saying, and you seem unwilling to consider, is that the 4E rules don't ever suggest anything remotely like that anywhere in the rules.  You say the DMG described "an abridged form of DnD" - then, by all means, show me where it does so. Because I don't see it and I've shown you several references that directly indicate otherwise</blockquote>

Verification