|
3 years ago ::
May 04, 2010 - 9:08AM
#31
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2007
|
I'm not sure you can play ADCP 2-2 at both H2 and H3, actually.
Based on Dave C's comment, I don't think you could play it at both H2 and H3 with the same character. But, AFAIK, there'd be nothing keeping you from playing it with one PC at H2, and a different PC at H3...it'd be no different from replaying any LFR adventure with a different PC.
Oh, that's definitely so.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 04, 2010 - 12:55PM
#32
|
Date Joined:
May 23, 2005
|
As I have said several times before. They should have kept the APL system from LG. The only difference from how LG did it that I think LFR should have done it is provide a 4th pdf in the module download, with that pdf being a pdf of the monsters for the module.
i.e Tracker, Rewards, Module, Monsters
This way a GM could print out only the correct APL level monsters when he runs. But oh well.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 04, 2010 - 9:47PM
#33
|
Date Joined:
Jul 16, 2002
|
APLs... *shudder* Good riddance I say.
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 05, 2010 - 8:46AM
#34
|
|
|
APLs were a nightmare from which I am glad we awakened.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 06, 2010 - 1:28AM
#35
|
|
|
It is an illusion to think that wider level bands help in this regard. First of all, it created odd story situations where you had simple bandits attack the farm at level 1 and fiendish tyranosauri at level 12. Secondly, it was a lot of work on the author and developers/reviewers and while monster stats are definitely easier in 4E than 3E it is still not instant work. It was also hard on DMs' preperation. Most importantly though, it only slightly lessened the table-forming/adventure availability issues, but it had its own problems (social pressure for PCs of widely seperate levels to join at the same table) and at mid-sized and smaller cons it was still very difficult to get tables formed. The only thing it did make easier was writing multi-part adventures, but in LG that came with its own issues 
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 07, 2010 - 6:21AM
#36
|
Date Joined:
Sep 12, 2007
|
It is an illusion to think that wider level bands help in this regard.
Just for the record I was reffering more to mods that include more than 1 tier. Like Paladin's Plague. I may have been unclear by using the term level banding. I meant the levels of play available for any given mod.
First of all, it created odd story situations where you had simple bandits attack the farm at level 1 and fiendish tyranosauri at level 12.
Seriously? Your reasoning is the creation of odd situations. It would be easier to count the mods that do not have odd situations. Let's just hope you do not also rule out contived plots or rehashed story lines. Ther would be nothign left.
Secondly, it was a lot of work on the author and developers/reviewers and while monster stats are definitely easier in 4E than 3E it is still not instant work.
Fewer mods + wider range of play = a similar amount of work.
It was also hard on DMs' preperation.
Umm how do you figure? Preping a mod with 3 tiers (6 possible combats) is easier than preping 6 different mods. And preping one tier is the same as preping 1 mod.
Most importantly though, it only slightly lessened the table-forming/adventure availability issues,
So slightly lessening is worse than doing nothing and leaving the problem as is?
but it had its own problems (social pressure for PCs of widely seperate levels to join at the same table) and at mid-sized and smaller cons it was still very difficult to get tables formed.
As opposed to now, where at midsized and smaller cons it is very difficult to get tables formed. Oh wait that would be the exact same.
The only thing it did make easier was writing multi-part adventures, but in LG that came with its own issues
I am assuming you are talking about storyline and plot. Yeah those were awful. *sarcasm*
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 07, 2010 - 8:14AM
#37
|
|
|
The only thing it did make easier was writing multi-part adventures, but in LG that came with its own issues
I am assuming you are talking about storyline and plot. Yeah those were awful. *sarcasm*
I was not, but whatever... (and considering the amount of plots and storylines I designed and developed for LG in my 8 years as Triad and Circle Member that would be rediculous to say.)
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 07, 2010 - 8:44AM
#38
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure that fewer mods with wider level ranges isn't going to solve any problems.
- It would be a similar amount of work overall, but that work would be spread out over fewer people, putting a larger burden on a few rather than a smaller burden on many. If one of these mega adventures was late, it would have a much more significant impact.
- Now, when we play a "bad" adventure, we can move on - there are many more adventures to choose from. If we had fewer adventures but for multiple level bands, we'd feel more impacted by the bad ones. This is a double-edged sword - we'd also feel more impacted by the good ones.
- Fewer adventures for a wider audience creates the same number of play opportunities at all level bands, but it doesn't do a while lot for story depth. You have fewer stories overall, which reduces the flavor of the campaign significantly.
I could go on, but in short, I think the idea is an awful one. Furthermore, having both written and organized for LG, I fully support all of Pieter's points. Let's face it, the guy knows what he's talking about.
Dave Kay
LFR Writing Director Retiree
dkay807 [at] yahoo [dot] com
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 07, 2010 - 9:03AM
#39
|
Date Joined:
Sep 12, 2007
|
- Fewer adventures for a wider audience creates the same number of play opportunities at all level bands, but it doesn't do a while lot for story depth. You have fewer stories overall, which reduces the flavor of the campaign significantly.
No, this is what I vehemently disagree with. One of the biggest problems with LFR is that it is nearly impossible to play any sort of cohesive campaign. You are just playing a whole bunch of random adventures that have nothing to do with each other. Trying to have a character follow a plot line or story arc is next to impossible. (The few that exist) I had to stop playing my primary character for a long time just to keep him from leveling in order to play the (Zhent story arc) specials. I had to metagame XP rewards to make certain I could play the story arc with out leveling out in the middle.
The currently problem is that there are so many stories that the campaign has no flavor. There are no consistant NPC's and story rewards do not matter. Heck I quit tracking them a long time ago and it has never mattered, good or bad. How many time have you heard this? Anyone have story reward X? Yeah, but not with this character.
Actions by the PC have no impact. Why do they care if they upset (or please) Mr. NPC when it will never matter in the future. And without a story arc to follow there can be nothign to reveal and nothing for people to anxiously await.
These are the things LFR is missing. These are the things I am missing.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 07, 2010 - 9:57AM
#40
|
|
|
I see your point, but I think it takes time for these things to grow. Think of all of these adventures as planted seeds. Out of these seeds, a few great storylines can begin to develop. I've seen some of what's coming - there are definitely some concrete, compelling storylines developing in a few places.
Since you so fondly recollect LG, consider where LG was in Year 2 -- it was still pretty chaotic. It wasn't until Year 3/4 that things really began to take off.
Dave Kay
LFR Writing Director Retiree
dkay807 [at] yahoo [dot] com
|
|
|
