Quote from: Windjammer;366963Just to say I echo this sentiment. AM used to say that he mainly writes argumentative posts in 4E discussions to clear up (accidental or deliberate) mispresentations of the game for the benefit of potential lurkers eaves dropping on the discussion in such threads.

I see no parallel benefit of engaging (in 4E threads) people purely at the level of ad hominems*, and consider such 'engagement's a complete waste of everyone's time. As others have pointed out before, it's contradictory to proclaim the activity as a waste of time and then engage at it at such length, repeatedly.

*If at all, that sort of behaviour might reflect badly on the author in the perception of the aforementioned lurkers.

Exactly.   We are talking about rulesets, which can be compared.  This particular thread did some good things in looking at the differences and what they are designed to do versus what they really do,  in terms of the marketplace demand and in terms of how they are seen.  This thread has had some good high points.

Quote from: jeff37923;366940Thank you both for this effort.

Seconded.

Quote from: Abyssal Maw;366955If you've given up on talking about the actual gaming part of the subject, all you actually have to do is leave... This isn't about your feelings.

When are you going to start talking about the actual gaming part and not your feelings?

Quote from: Abyssal Maw;366939And the reason for that is they are also checking to see if the writer even understands how to write for D&D4.

I'd have thought that's because people like combat.

Seanchai

Quote from: LordVreeg;366972Exactly.   We are talking about rulesets, which can be compared.  This particular thread did some good things in looking at the differences and what they are designed to do versus what they really do,  in terms of the marketplace demand and in terms of how they are seen.  This thread has had some good high points.

I agree.

Quote from: Sigmund;366967...what I'm saying is it's the person (in this case me), and the system both.

Except it has nothing to do with this system.

Quote from: Sigmund;366967It's not the way I want my games to work. I don't like it. It's my personal point of view. I've never claimed otherwise.

You just did: "...what I'm saying is it's the person (in this case me), and the system both" and "The reason I know it's also the system is because I don't have this problem with..."

Unless you're claiming that the system changes from person to person, it's pretty damn static and objective.

Quote from: Sigmund;366967What I have a problem with is people like you trying to infer I'm somehow unable to cope with the "new tech".

I didn't say anything like that.

Quote from: Sigmund;366967The tools it offers don't provide the experience that I'm looking for as a player in an RPG. What the flying fuck is so hard to understand about that?

Absolutely nothing, save for what you're suggesting are the tools it's offering.

Seanchai

Quote from: Seanchai;366981I didn't say anything like that.

Seanchai

Liar.

You said it in this post.
If you are going to argue, then you should try to do so in good faith.

Quote from: Seanchai;366977I'd have thought that's because people like combat.

Seanchai

The official modules are (of course) going to have combat encounters in them (this is for D&D, which is a game about adventure, not exploring our feelings and improv theater techniques), but from what I read, the requirement for two battles mentioned in the article is regarding the sample you send in in order to even get your official writers guidelines (he mentions how mad he is that Shawn won't send him a copy of the writers guidelines, when basically the guy just wants to post it on his blog and complain about them). It is also worth noting that the blog post here is outdated (July 08). There's a newer process now. I think the official adventures generally *do* have a minimum of 2 battles in them, though that can be made optional in various ways (the links above shows two examples).
As I said, getting people to do things differently than they have always done them (whether DMs or players or writers or whoever) is a struggle.  What I want to show here is that it really isn't so simple as "oh, it's ALL this certain way I have imagined in my mind, and heard about on from some other dude on the internet..."

Quote from: Seanchai;366981Except it has nothing to do with this system.

Yes it does. Why are you the only person that doesn't understand this?

QuoteYou just did: "...what I'm saying is it's the person (in this case me), and the system both" and "The reason I know it's also the system is because I don't have this problem with..."

Unless you're claiming that the system changes from person to person, it's pretty damn static and objective.

I would think you'd be capable of understanding this. That is, unless you're simply trolling again, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and explain it again. I as a player have a certain experience that I expect from an RPG. This expectation has been developed playing many RPGs over many years. It was an experience that every version of DnD has provided. Until now. Many other games provide this experience. 4e DnD does not. The company that designed and released 4e DnD made deliberate changes to the 4e of DnD for the express purpose of providing this difference in experience. So, the problem is both that I as a person and a player have a set of expectations when I sit down to play a RPG, and the RPG we're referring to was deliberately designed to alter or ignore the facets of an a RPG that have come to expect. Notice I'm not assigning an objective value judgment on this, I am acknowledging that it is a subjective issue, but in this particular case it is an issue that stems both from my expectations and from the deliberate choices that were made in the design of 4e that deviate from previous versions of the game.

QuoteI didn't say anything like that.

Then what exactly did you mean when you wrote, "It seems to me that it's a bit my like grandmother and cell phones. She's convinced that every time she tried to call a cell phone, she has some kind of problem. It's all very real to her, but it doesn't indicate some kind of objective problem with cell phones for every one else."

QuoteAbsolutely nothing, save for what you're suggesting are the tools it's offering.

Seanchai

Ah, so what you are saying is that what I'm saying are the tools 4e offers are not actually the tools it really offers, is that right?

For what it's worth, I don't see anyone's dislike of any system (D&D4 or anything else) as being a big deal. I generally can't stand games with dice pools or that only use 6-siders, or that involve tick marks for experience on percentile skills.  Personal preference is exactly what it is, and nobody needs to feel like they need an excuse not to like something.

It doesn't mean those are bad systems, but I can't stand to play them (and thus..don't). I also manage somehow to not talk about them.

Quote from: Abyssal Maw;366987The official modules are (of course) going to have combat encounters in them (this is for D&D, which is a game about adventure, not exploring our feelings and improv theater techniques), but from what I read, the requirement for two battles mentioned in the article is regarding the sample you send in in order to even get your official writers guidelines (he mentions how mad he is that Shawn won't send him a copy of the writers guidelines, when basically the guy just wants to post it on his blog and complain about them). It is also worth noting that the blog post here is outdated (July 08). There's a newer process now. I think the official adventures generally *do* have a minimum of 2 battles in them, though that can be made optional in various ways (the links above shows two examples).
As I said, getting people to do things differently than they have always done them (whether DMs or players or writers or whoever) is a struggle.  What I want to show here is that it really isn't so simple as "oh, it's ALL this certain way I have imagined in my mind, and heard about on from some other dude on the internet..."

Well, I don't know what I hear on street corners and bars.  AM, what kind of credit is given for changing a battle to a parley, or avoiding a battle?  Especially if it is objective driven?

Quote from: Abyssal Maw;366992It doesn't mean those are bad systems, but I can't stand to play them (and thus..don't). I also manage somehow to not talk about them.

It's a lot easier to ignore the mice running around the floor when there's an 800-lb gorilla standing right in front of you.  

Quote from: LordVreeg;367002Well, I don't know what I hear on street corners and bars.  AM, what kind of credit is given for changing a battle to a parley, or avoiding a battle?  Especially if it is objective driven?

I'm not sure what kind of credit you are looking for. There's no oversight for adventures that get played. The only objective is "people having fun playing D&D".

Quote from: Peregrin;367008It's a lot easier to ignore the mice running around the floor when there's an 800-lb gorilla standing right in front of you.  

I guess it depends on who shows up on any given day. For example, depending on the person, "D&D4e is already going out of print", "it isn't actually a success", "not played at all in my area", "just because everyone plays it, doesn't mean it's any good", etc.

And yet all of those people holding those opinions are going to want to talk about it. A lot.  

I mean, I'd rather talk about how to run an assassination as a skill challenge, personally (or something like that..). Everything being argued here was old news by August 2008-- it is a done deal- a foregone conclusion.

Quote from: Abyssal Maw;367020I'm not sure what kind of credit you are looking for. There's no oversight for adventures that get played. The only objective is "people having fun playing D&D".

Experience/credit towards next level/

Something I forgot to upload for my OP: here are the actual tables for random encounters I use in conjunction with the map.

1. I divide each hex in 6 sections (Northwest, Northeast, East, Southeast, Southwest, West), so PCs crossing a hex will have an entry and an exit section on that hex. Drawing smaller scale maps is too much hassle for myself, and I'm happier to let players do that sort of stuff at the table for me as I add in details as we go along. I should say that the first chapter in Renegade Crowns (a WFRPG 2e supplement) is superb for adding hex details on the fly.

2. When PCs enter a new hex I determine a terrain type roughly by just looking at the 'world map' shown in the OP. Since each section covers 20 miles of travel, the chance of an encounter occuring when the PCs traverse that hex section is much higher than for customary 4-miles hexes.

3. Once terrain type is selected and it turns out that the PCs encounter something, I roll a d100 on the appropriate chart (displayed shortly). The chart will then give me an info like this (using the first entry in the first table):

Quote01-05   Beetles     1 (30)

So if I roll 04 I know it's going to be beetles. The numbers then tell me that that's a level 1 encounter, and that the whole encounter has been built in the MM on page 30. So the last number is always a reference to the MM, in its 'Encounter Groups' subsection for each monster entry.

A more complex entry (still using the same chart for swamps) is this:

Quote18-23   Drakes    2, 4, 5 (92); MM2: 3 (89)

This tells me that the PCs could encounter drakes at different encounter levels - 2, 4, or 5 (all referenced on page 92 of the MM). Pick the encounter level randomly (here: 1d3, = roll 1d6 and divide result by 2) or pick something you like. Beyond the semi-colon there's the info that in the second Monster Manual for 4E there's another level 3 encounter group on page 89. This is useful info when I don't want to re-use an encounter in the MM1, or when the MM2 offers a different encounter level (which it is very good at).

So basically all I need is the two Monster Manuals for 4E at the table, and to consult their entries for encounter groups. I could also build my own encounters before the session, but I prefer to keep the excitement for myself when rolling it up right there when the players enter a new hex. Often they have to run as they face a monster 10+ levels above what they can kill. Divinination and scouting ritual magic is paramount. The best reconnaissance ritual in the game - Farsight (see the free download in Dragon magazine 366, page 57; or the book Arcane Power, page 155) - is level 16, so I lowered that and made it a bit cheaper. It basically lets players to place a scrying sensor as far as they can see ('your senses reach to the horizon when you will it').

Finally, not all monsters are hostile. I changed the alignment entries in the MMs quite a bit. More stuff is unaligned, and I re-introduced monsters of good alignment who are willing to to be 'pacified' by the PCs.

Anyway, here are my tables. Hopefully at least some guys can decipher my script and find the tables useful.