No "wider" Sweet Spot in 4E after all?

One of the early comments the designers made was that 4E was designed so that the "sweet spot" would last throughout levels 1-30. At the very least, I expected a much less narrow "sweet spot." 3E had a sweet spot between about 8-12.

I recently saw a list of all the 4E Dungeon adventures by level. Guess what? About half of the adventures fall between late heroic and early paragon. In other words, levels 8-12.

Is this evidence that the 4E designers failed and again the most interesting levels to play is a narrow range at about the same spot? Just far enough into the cycle you have a number of options, but not far enough that you have too many.

Or is this just laziness on the Dungeon staff? Are they only designing "what they know" and sticking with the same tired levels they did in 3E?

Or, is it something else?

I suspect it has more to do with marking sure the games reach the most number of potential GMs and that the system at six months old probably doesn't have a lot of playres who've reached the epic levels without starting there.

JoeGKushner said:

I suspect it has more to do with marking sure the games reach the most number of potential GMs and that the system at six months old probably doesn't have a lot of playres who've reached the epic levels without starting there.

Click to expand...

However, there is also a lack of low level adventures as well. You would think they would want beginning players to have a number of choices as well. Right now, they don't.

Keep on the Shadowfell
The FR adventure
The DMG adventure
The adventure in the introductory boxed set
Scales of War starting adventure path adventure.
FR adventure in the setting book.

I'm sure I'm missing others but there doesn't seem to be a solid dearth of 'em.

From experience playing three separate campaigns through to a max of 13th level (so far), I haven't found a "sweet spot" yet.

Low Heroic PCs have much more to do (and can last longer) than comparative PCs in previous editions. It feels satisfying and challenging. Low Paragon PCs are a mix. Martial PCs have more to do than comparative 3e PCs (more powers, etc). Conversely, arcane/divine PC have less options. Both are good things.

It doesn't feel like the game is getting any less challenging or more cumbersome. Our Paragon fights are taking slightly longer than our Heroic fights, but not by nearly the same margin as 3e. We'd be lucky to get through 2 complex fights in a 4-hour session in 3e, after about 12th level.

...and it doesn't even feel like they're getting supremely powerful yet. Our main campaign has been running since a couple weeks after 4e was released. The party is 13th level. In a recent fight, a single umber hulk and a pack of troglodyte allies had them calling for their brown trousers. 6 months of play and 13 levels into a 3e campaign, my party is typically expecting major demons, huge dragons, and liches. In 4e, the thought of anything like that at 13th level makes them ill... which gives me hope for exciting things still to come at much higher levels.

Now, we haven't experienced Epic yet. The wheels might fall off completely once we do. But so far, I haven't experienced anything to suggest that there's a narrow sweet spot. That's part of why I like the new system.

There are a number of low level adventures available as Joe already noted. The game is just 6 months out so there just won't be as many groups already in epic play. The market need right now is for mid-heroic through mid-paragon. The first epic lvl Dungeon adventure just rolled out this month (I think). No surprise, mystery or conspiracy needed to explain that.

For me the 3e sweet spot is around 5-8, by 9th level the full spellcasters tend to dominate.

Whoa jumping to conclusions much? If Wizards had focused their efforts on the Paragon and Epic Tiers in the first six months of the game, do you think there would have been more, or less complaining?

JoeGKushner said:

I suspect it has more to do with marking sure the games reach the most number of potential GMs and that the system at six months old probably doesn't have a lot of playres who've reached the epic levels without starting there.

Click to expand...

wedgeski said:

Whoa jumping to conclusions much? If Wizards had focused their efforts on the Paragon and Epic Tiers in the first six months of the game, do you think there would have been more, or less complaining?

Click to expand...

I agree with these. I think it's a matter of writing for the biggest amounts of people possible.

For what it is worth, the sweet spot definitely extends to at least level 15 and I do not see anything that could change before at least level 21, if ever.

Cheers

I don't know whether there's a sweet spot feel in play (I don't play 4E), but I definitely don't see one based on levels of published adventures. I charted them on a Power Point slide, and it shows a heavily weighted bias towards low level adventures, with no sweet spot. For a new game, this would sound logical to me. As time goes on, and there are more higher level adventures, it should even out. But, there's definitely not a concentration of adventures in the 8th to 12th range.

I included 2009 releases on the chart (which are mostly higher level adventures) along with all other WoTC officialy published adventures. The chart in the right hand corner of the picture is starting level distribution.