nnms
First Post
From Mike Mearls' interview with Wired:
Where Is D&D Headed Next? An Update with Mike Mearls ... And the Public Playtest Begins | GeekDad | Wired.com
- Hit Point progression will be flatter than previous editions which allows for a wider range of monsters and threats to be level appropriate.
- Monster design will be relative to PC abilities like 4E
- Level 1 survivability might be a dial that gets turned to where you want it
- Monsters use the same framework as PCs and are a bit too lethal as a result.
Despite loving 4E's departure from the 3.x reference-to-zero framework in favor of relative-to-PC-level game-centric concerns, I have since fallen out of love with it and desire a system where the mechanics represent the narrative and its internal consistency. So I'm hoping monster math is not merely tied to the capabilities of the PC without connecting it to the characteristics of the monsters in the fiction.
Where Is D&D Headed Next? An Update with Mike Mearls ... And the Public Playtest Begins | GeekDad | Wired.com
For instance, monsters still need some work, and the starting character hit points are a bit inflated to account for that.
andFor instance, we just talked today about a rule that lets DMs hand out bonus hit points at first level. The DM gets to determine if adventurers in the campaign are lucky, blessed by the gods, or otherwise destined for greatness.
We could infer a lot from this. Here are some possibilities (that may contradict one another).- Hit Point progression will be flatter than previous editions which allows for a wider range of monsters and threats to be level appropriate.
- Monster design will be relative to PC abilities like 4E
- Level 1 survivability might be a dial that gets turned to where you want it
- Monsters use the same framework as PCs and are a bit too lethal as a result.
Despite loving 4E's departure from the 3.x reference-to-zero framework in favor of relative-to-PC-level game-centric concerns, I have since fallen out of love with it and desire a system where the mechanics represent the narrative and its internal consistency. So I'm hoping monster math is not merely tied to the capabilities of the PC without connecting it to the characteristics of the monsters in the fiction.
AD&D added more flexibility to characters, 3e created a logical framework of rules, and 4e created a math framework for the game. All of those things are steps forward for D&D and every edition has contributed to this new iteration.
I think 4E's math framework can work for a more exploration based game (in contrast with a tactical encounter based game) as long as something is done about encounter and daily refresh cycles.