Speculation about "the feelz" of D&D 4th Edition

[Garthanos]

In that environment casting was so premium that the most we would ever do was maybe have a couple guys that were MC fighters, maybe a bard, something like that. You better have access to 5th level spells, or you were probably not pulling your weight.

Gygax figured anybody who would stick with the game to higher levels would play magic users since that was where the power and interesting choices were it wasn't even an accident that fighters felt like side kicks ... it just wasn't his area of interest.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Gygax figured anybody who would stick with the game to higher levels would play magic users since that was where the power and interesting choices were it wasn't even an accident that fighters felt like side kicks ... it just wasn't his area of interest.

Eh, yes and no. My understanding is 'Lord Robilar' was the original 20th level character, and it was a fighter. So I don't think we can just assume it was that simple. I think Gygax came up with interesting things for the fighters when they did get high level. I also don't think that he intended wizards (in OD&D core) to be some sort of dominant character at higher levels. I think they didn't really know much of what they were doing and just figured that the name-level 'end game' was building domains, where the fighter would be pretty much on-par with the wizard in terms of army building and whatnot. He'd get a bit better army, but no fireballs.

 

[Garthanos]

Eh, yes and no.

I am going with more yes less no... I wasnt quoting Gygax "word for word" but it was very close to a quasi-quote at least his thinking that anybody that stuck with the game he figured would gravitate to magic users because of power and choices. There was an awful lot of magic user advancement after 9th or tenth level.. and umm meh for the fighting man. I think the best Gygax had to offer for the high level fighter was maybe magic items at levels when MUs could change in to dragons and similar things going on.


The only 9+ adventuring i saw in the wild was much like the lower level adventuring... so this could have been theory and practice diverging. (not even sure what you are supposed to do with the castle)

 

[Garthanos]

i will admit it is possible for magic items to bring awesome to the table... but then again it really isnt the character doing it at that point is it. And it definitely didn't represent "interesting choices" in the 1e era.

OK I will cop to it, it was not intentional just predictable given his attitudes

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I am going with more yes less no... I wasnt quoting Gygax "word for word" but it was very close to a quasi-quote at least his thinking that anybody that stuck with the game he figured would gravitate to magic users because of power and choices. There was an awful lot of magic user advancement after 9th or tenth level.. and umm meh for the fighting man. I think the best Gygax had to offer for the high level fighter was maybe magic items at levels when MUs could change in to dragons and similar things going on.


The only 9+ adventuring i saw in the wild was much like the lower level adventuring... so this could have been theory and practice diverging. (not even sure what you are supposed to do with the castle)

Well, I've heard that Gygax statement too. I don't doubt that he said it, and saying it I don't doubt that he meant it. If you look at things like the 'Council of Eight' thing in Greyhawk, I would assume that arises out of actual EGG campaign events. That sort of play certainly sounds like mostly wizards playing god games.

I think the game evolved a lot though. At first there were only up to 6th level spells, and the range of available spell effects was much more limited. In effect 12th level was about as high as the rules provided for in any significant way. I think in the early days they probably assumed players would run PCs up to something around level 10 and then they would spin off into being lords and probably semi-retired as adventurers. Over time the concept of the game evolved, people weren't that interested in the wargame aspect. So the divergence of PCs into running strongholds and whatnot faded in importance. At the same time new material was developed, and it was most interesting to add new high level stuff. Eldritch Wizardry brought demons and devils, including demon lords, Gods, Demigods, and Heroes brought in even more high level stuff. By the time the 1e PHB was written level advancement to level 20 was clearly envisaged, and that was really only 4 years or so after the game came out. I would say the game that 1e envisages is definitely a high level wizard-fest, mostly. Clerics get into the action somewhat, druids and other casters do OK, but the non-casters in 1e are pretty much stuck with slightly better versions of what they got at level 1. Fighters particularly still have their now kind of rump stronghold stuff, but in the 1e play paradigm its sort of a side show.

 

[Parmandur]

Well, I've heard that Gygax statement too. I don't doubt that he said it, and saying it I don't doubt that he meant it. If you look at things like the 'Council of Eight' thing in Greyhawk, I would assume that arises out of actual EGG campaign events. That sort of play certainly sounds like mostly wizards playing god games.

I think the game evolved a lot though. At first there were only up to 6th level spells, and the range of available spell effects was much more limited. In effect 12th level was about as high as the rules provided for in any significant way. I think in the early days they probably assumed players would run PCs up to something around level 10 and then they would spin off into being lords and probably semi-retired as adventurers. Over time the concept of the game evolved, people weren't that interested in the wargame aspect. So the divergence of PCs into running strongholds and whatnot faded in importance. At the same time new material was developed, and it was most interesting to add new high level stuff. Eldritch Wizardry brought demons and devils, including demon lords, Gods, Demigods, and Heroes brought in even more high level stuff. By the time the 1e PHB was written level advancement to level 20 was clearly envisaged, and that was really only 4 years or so after the game came out. I would say the game that 1e envisages is definitely a high level wizard-fest, mostly. Clerics get into the action somewhat, druids and other casters do OK, but the non-casters in 1e are pretty much stuck with slightly better versions of what they got at level 1. Fighters particularly still have their now kind of rump stronghold stuff, but in the 1e play paradigm its sort of a side show.

What's interesting there is that most people abandon and start up new PVs ~12 or so, apparently: that high level play is as much theoretical as stronghold play.

Sent from my BLU LIFE XL using EN World mobile app

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

What's interesting there is that most people abandon and start up new PVs ~12 or so, apparently: that high level play is as much theoretical as stronghold play.

Sent from my BLU LIFE XL using EN World mobile app

It can be. I think in the old days, or maybe more in the days of our youth as gamers, we were most attracted to zonky high-level antics and played a very reward-driven game where getting lots of lootz and being 29th level was all the rage. The guy that DMed mostly for me, and myself, had a kind of shared world back then, characters migrated back and forth between campaigns a lot. His campaign was FILLED with these god-characters, but when we got more interested in playing a more challenging and deeper game they just faded into the background, and became in effect sort of 'demi-gods' or whatnot.

I assume some similar process happened in many games, but there was a time period VERY early on when high level play barely existed. In that time period I think fighters, wizards, clerics, and thieves were all sort of on a par.

And yes, in our later play we didn't tend to play much past 9th or 12th level anymore. Now and then we'd get a few characters up to 12th or 14th level and then some sort of crazy cosmic thing would happen and the campaign would wrap up.

Now you look at 4e, and its like ITS high level play is different. Its more an extension of low-level play with epic elements added back into it in a more workable fashion. IMHO WotC made a design mistake though when they created a 30 level system. 4e should have been a 20 level system, with Epic being a sort of capstone of 3-5 levels at the top, leaving say 7 or 8 levels each of heroic and paragon tier (which is going to play out pretty much as 4e did, 7 levels vs 10 isn't a big difference). Epic then gets to be a more climactic single big story-arc or 2-3 closely related ones. It would also mean that there are 10 less levels worth of 'stuff' that have to be invented, which cuts back on clutter. Additionally bonus growth is trimmed back and you get something a bit more like 5e's 'BA' without needing to flatten the curve so much. I've found that it works well in HoML, there's a lot less 'filler powers' and such. We're nowhere near running epic level stuff, and maybe never will, but I think 3 levels of epic is plenty of room to engineer a good campaign climax. There could always be a sort of 'bonus level' that was 'level 21' for doing an apotheosis or whatever, or as a sort of post-retirement state for reprising characters in later games.

 

[Parmandur]

It can be. I think in the old days, or maybe more in the days of our youth as gamers, we were most attracted to zonky high-level antics and played a very reward-driven game where getting lots of lootz and being 29th level was all the rage. The guy that DMed mostly for me, and myself, had a kind of shared world back then, characters migrated back and forth between campaigns a lot. His campaign was FILLED with these god-characters, but when we got more interested in playing a more challenging and deeper game they just faded into the background, and became in effect sort of 'demi-gods' or whatnot.

I assume some similar process happened in many games, but there was a time period VERY early on when high level play barely existed. In that time period I think fighters, wizards, clerics, and thieves were all sort of on a par.

And yes, in our later play we didn't tend to play much past 9th or 12th level anymore. Now and then we'd get a few characters up to 12th or 14th level and then some sort of crazy cosmic thing would happen and the campaign would wrap up.

Now you look at 4e, and its like ITS high level play is different. Its more an extension of low-level play with epic elements added back into it in a more workable fashion. IMHO WotC made a design mistake though when they created a 30 level system. 4e should have been a 20 level system, with Epic being a sort of capstone of 3-5 levels at the top, leaving say 7 or 8 levels each of heroic and paragon tier (which is going to play out pretty much as 4e did, 7 levels vs 10 isn't a big difference). Epic then gets to be a more climactic single big story-arc or 2-3 closely related ones. It would also mean that there are 10 less levels worth of 'stuff' that have to be invented, which cuts back on clutter. Additionally bonus growth is trimmed back and you get something a bit more like 5e's 'BA' without needing to flatten the curve so much. I've found that it works well in HoML, there's a lot less 'filler powers' and such. We're nowhere near running epic level stuff, and maybe never will, but I think 3 levels of epic is plenty of room to engineer a good campaign climax. There could always be a sort of 'bonus level' that was 'level 21' for doing an apotheosis or whatever, or as a sort of post-retirement state for reprising characters in later games.

To bring my newest toy back up again, DCC RPG flattens the leveling to just 10: level 8 is Epic, world shattering play already.

Sent from my BLU LIFE XL using EN World mobile app

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

To bring my newest toy back up again, DCC RPG flattens the leveling to just 10: level 8 is Epic, world shattering play already.

Sent from my BLU LIFE XL using EN World mobile app

I thought 10 levels was a bit extreme, based on 13a. However, in a more OSR type of game like DCC that might work fine.

 

[Parmandur]

I thought 10 levels was a bit extreme, based on 13a. However, in a more OSR type of game like DCC that might work fine.

It seems designed to keep things loose and casual as a whole. The XP system is pretty simple, too, DM assigns 1-3 points per scene played through.

Sent from my BLU LIFE XL using EN World mobile app