Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Obryn" data-source="post: 6008121" data-attributes="member: 11821">No idea. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  I tend to run shorter campaigns, myself.  But to have a 3-year 4e campaign right now, it has to have started in 2008 or 2009.  For 3e, games could have hit the 3 year mark anywhere from 2003 to ... well, now.  So that's the stacked deck, basically; narrower mathematical opportunity.I personally made the mistake of running through the HPE series for Campaign <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=1" target="_blank">#1</a> .  Nightwyrm Fortress, fortunately, is such a godawful adventure with zero redeeming qualities that I was able to cancel it and start over again with a better setting and a more cohesive character-centered game.  I am guessing I am not alone in that.That helps, no doubt.  But the accelerated advancement of 3e and 4e makes those sorts of 10+ year games more difficult without slowing down advancement.  I've slowed it somewhat myself, so 2 years in, we're at 15th.And yes - restricted magic items + inherent bonuses is an awesome way to run the game.-O</blockquote>