[D&D4E] Some WOTC encounters
Chris_Chinn:
Hi Callan,
Quote
Basically, looking past TPK's for now, there is no yardstick to judge performance by.
Actually, there's quite a bit of yardsticks you can use, when you're judging combat:
1. How many rounds did it take to defeat the opponents?
2. How many hitpoints did the party lose? Did the party have to use any Healing Surges?
3. Did the party have to use any Daily Powers?
4. Did the party have to use any consumable resources (Healing potions, "Fire Bombs" via alchemy, etc.)?
All of these form simple metrics you can use to judge a party's ability to deal with an encounter.
"Tactics" involve specific choices, round to round, to improve these metrics. If you're actually at all interested in gamist D&D tactics, just take a look around the WOTC D&D boards and ENworld forum as well - there's plenty of folks talking about better or worse tactics to use in play.
Chris
Anders Gabrielsson:
I agree with Chris that there is more gradation to victory and loss than TPK or not TPK. The characters could flee (with some left dead or not), different amount of resources could be used etc.
Callan S.:
Guys, it's not a mechanic/a mechanical component just because it comes to your mind!? These are all made up evaluations! Or if your going to leap to argue that, then tell me what an actual built into the mechanics yardstick would look like? Would it be written in the physical text along with some 'this is important' text near it?
That even cuts both ways - even my assertion that a TPK is a fail - is that written in the text as a fail? Explicitly? Even I could be said to be making that up, given the wording that I recall in the texts.
Anyway, regardless, I'd like to talk about yardsticks that are written in the physical text itself. I want the yardstick the authors have to give (if any!), I don't want to turn around and ignore them in favour of something I made up. I wouldn't bother reaching out to someone else if in the end I was just going to turn to myself for that.
Chris_Chinn:
Hi Callan,
That's a rather ridiculous narrow definition of what qualifies for talking about D&D gamism and success, here. Plenty of games from most sports to chess measure more than simply win/loss ratios as important measurements of ability - even though "no mechanics for tracking such things exist" as part of the game.
Were you actually interested in talking about D&D and challenge or just to grind your axe about D&D?
Chris
Callan S.:
Chris, with the right set of eyes they would find your own preferences ridiculous. C'mon, the human default is to think oneself has won the magical belief lottery and has the right belief/preference and so is qualified to determine what is, overall, rediculous. If were working from the default, well then my dad could beat your dad anyday...
C'mon, take two! No default! Or you can instead just say my preference is so rare and held by so few (or just me) you'll skip talking on it, fair enough.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page