|
3 years ago ::
Sep 04, 2010 - 11:33AM
#91
|
Date Joined:
Sep 20, 2004
|
If we're going to improve LFR, how about this:
there's got to be a way to adjust LFR games so they actually do fit in that 4 hour time slot. It's as though we're punished for advancing to paragon tier with more grinding.
Rule Zero: Save vs. Hivemind
http://rulezeroblog.wordpress.com
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 04, 2010 - 9:55PM
#92
|
Date Joined:
Feb 11, 2006
|
If we're going to improve LFR, how about this:
there's got to be a way to adjust LFR games so they actually do fit in that 4 hour time slot. It's as though we're punished for advancing to paragon tier with more grinding.
Yeah, that's been one of my biggest problems with paragon. There's just no way to get it done on time without calling the fights early.
I played CORE 2-8 during a home game last week. We started at 2:30, and weren't done with the first fight until 6. I left early. I heard that the rest of the mod took until 10. Now, I was told that's not typical, but there's a risk that we're going to turn paragon and epic until a "have vs. have-nots" situation. As in, those who have lots of extra time to play LFR, and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 05, 2010 - 11:29PM
#93
|
|
|
Man, we're still talking about this? I'm glad to see that the original suggestion has been thoroughly trounced.
you are glad to see that the original suggestion of fixing the most egregious game balance problems has been trounced?!?
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 06, 2010 - 7:59AM
#94
|
Date Joined:
Feb 11, 2006
|
you are glad to see that the original suggestion of fixing the most egregious game balance problems has been trounced?!?
Your original suggestion is basically to pick and choose which D&D rules we follow in LFR, and even though I do think that some things cause game problems, you know I can't agree with that. Not only does it create a game that's distinct from D&D, but it's going to be impossible to get everyone to agree with what stays and what goes.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 06, 2010 - 12:28PM
#95
|
|
|
you are glad to see that the original suggestion of fixing the most egregious game balance problems has been trounced?!?
In short: you have a particular view of what works and doesn't work in 4E (which is perfectly cool). What's become clear as this thread has developed is that a lot of other posters don't share your view on what "needs to be fixed".
It's great if you and your group share a particular play style, and a similar desire for strong challenge. Some of your posts, however, come across as though you feel that that your way is the "one true way", and that differing styles of play (or differing views on the rules) have less validity.
"Of course [Richard] has a knife. He always has a knife. We all have knives. It's 1183, and we're barbarians!" - Eleanor of Aquitaine, "The Lion in Winter"
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 10, 2010 - 1:50PM
#96
|
|
|
If we're going to improve LFR, how about this:
there's got to be a way to adjust LFR games so they actually do fit in that 4 hour time slot. It's as though we're punished for advancing to paragon tier with more grinding.
While there are definitely hard to finish adventures out there, both your DM and you as a player have a lot of influence on this. For example, when I run a LFR game, I tend to predraw the battlemaps, select miniatures and put them into seperate plastic backs and even select status effects cardboard tents. Similarly, I look at the adventure and try to estimate the timeline, and to help facilitate I note down when encounters start and end while running the game to reinforce to myself the fact that I am running on a schedule. It is a trick I learned while running playtests, and realizing I had an easier time to keep things within time while running those even though we spend more time discussing encounters than we usually do.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 10, 2010 - 3:27PM
#97
|
|
|
If we're going to improve LFR, how about this:
there's got to be a way to adjust LFR games so they actually do fit in that 4 hour time slot. It's as though we're punished for advancing to paragon tier with more grinding.
While there are definitely hard to finish adventures out there, both your DM and you as a player have a lot of influence on this. For example, when I run a LFR game, I tend to predraw the battlemaps, select miniatures and put them into seperate plastic backs and even select status effects cardboard tents. Similarly, I look at the adventure and try to estimate the timeline, and to help facilitate I note down when encounters start and end while running the game to reinforce to myself the fact that I am running on a schedule. It is a trick I learned while running playtests, and realizing I had an easier time to keep things within time while running those even though we spend more time discussing encounters than we usually do.
In addition to pre-drawing maps, I also pre-roll initiative and jot down a few tactical notes on the stat sheet (i.e. what powers a monster will probably start with). I occasionally call fights when the outcome is obvious - or have the monsters surrender/run away after a certian point.
There are a lot of things a DM can do to speed up mods, it's probably a whole other thread.
Allen.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 10, 2010 - 8:53PM
#98
|
Date Joined:
Sep 20, 2004
|
oh sure. I pre-draw maps, get minis out, take the highlighter to the mod to point out stuff. I call fights.
Even then, LFR breaks down at paragon.
Rule Zero: Save vs. Hivemind
http://rulezeroblog.wordpress.com
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 11, 2010 - 12:52AM
#99
|
Date Joined:
Mar 29, 2001
|
Players do not alpha-strike, powergame, min-max, or optimize merely because this or that rules option allows them to do so.
Players do these things BECAUSE THEY WANT TO.
In any given playerbase, you will ALWAYS have a significant percentage that engage in these activities to some degree.
You cannot prevent it. You cannot stop it. It will always happen.
Players will find a way. Whether it's action points or whatever, they'll find a way to do what they want to do. Change the rules and they'll just find a different way.
Asking LFR to adjust this or that game option because you personally think it's unbalanced is therefore more or less pointless. Even if you set aside the fact that LFR CANNOT make such changes unless it's directly impacting the organized play structure, you end up balancing and re-balancing rules continuously for the life of the campaign.
And it'd be ultimately pointless. Every table is different. What is balanced for one group of players is totally unbalanced for another. You cannot sit there and keep trying to stamp out corner cases and extremist builds. It's a waste of time.
Instead, this is why you have a live DM running the table. Instead of a robot or something.
It is the DM's job to do the final balancing for the individual tables. Only they can see what a given table needs, and adjust on the fly accordingly.
-karma
LFR Characters:
Lady Tiana Elinden Kobori Silverwane - Drow Control Wizard
Kro'tak Warscream - Orc Bard
Fulcrum of Gond - Warforged Laser Cleric
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 12, 2010 - 1:09PM
#100
|
|
|
One change I'd really really love to see is not allowing background aside from Forgotten Realms and general. I am so tired of seeing people with Scales of War's "Auspicious Birth" or "Born Under a Bad Sign" as their chosen Background effect. This would make the regions more attractive again, though the large numbers of heroes from Impiltur and Thay would still continue.
Personally, I'd like to see the Realms Regions background redone to better match the new story zones. LFR has already become a flavorless blend of everything in the WotC product release kitchen sink why not try and restore at least some of the Realms actual flavor back to the sink?
|
|
|
