Power Level of Characters Will Decline

[GrinningBuddha]

Beaten to the punch...

 

[Aenghus]

I don't think it is simple as "less powerful" or "more powerful". My suspicion is that 4e characters will be tactically "more powerful" and strategically "less powerful".

That is, at will and per encounter powers will grant PCs greater endurance in the size and numbers of encounters they can handle. I think the removal of some high-end magic, and probable restriction of other problematic magic, will reduce the strategic power of PCs to go anywhere and do anything. The developers have said that there will be a more gradual growth of power with increasing level.

As regard the 30th level PCs taking on gods comment, I think this should be interpreted as: if the players of these characters really want conflict with a god, they should be facilitated in some way plotwise, as opposed to just calling out a god High Noon style.

 

[Lord Fyre]

I believe this is all a misinterpretation. I recall being said that a sweet-spot of play in 3e was observed to be between levels 4th and 15th-ish. And also said that in 4e the sweet-spot will extend from levels 1 to level 30.

The sweet-spot equivalence was not the same as power level equivalence.

Of course, I doubt that this "sweet-spot" idea will actually work in practice.

Seems like an effort hype the product and confuse the gaming public with meaningless jargon. :\

 

[Felon]

Of course, I doubt that this "sweet-spot" idea will actually work in practice.

Seems like an effort hype the product and confuse the gaming public with meaningless jargon. :\

The jargon's not meaningless. They've explained the meaning of "sweet spot" as a point between that currently experienced at the lowest levels, where important characters (both PC's and "boss" NPC's) are so fragile that a single hit will drop them, and that at the extremely high levels, where it's all about who fails a save first. The sweet spot offers just the right amount of challenge.

 

[the Jester]

Of course, I doubt that this "sweet-spot" idea will actually work in practice.

Seems like an effort hype the product and confuse the gaming public with meaningless jargon. :\

I seem to recall some specific discussion of this by the designers- they said (iirc) that the 'sweet spot' is the range where pcs and monsters are not so weak that they are killed by the first lucky shot, yet aren't so strong that it's all about who gets the initiative. I remember a few comments about the sweet spot being the "right amount" of complexity, with a number of meaningful choices but no overwhelming mass of new stuff to keep track of.

And seriously, the "sweet spot" is far from meaningless jargon; it's been discussed by the gaming public for YEARS prior to the announcement. I have been in discussions both on Enworld and with my gaming crew about it, personally. Heck, the whole E6 system is all about extending the sweet spot for a given game.

Just out of curiosity, why do you doubt whether trying to make the sweet spot all levels will work? Do you have any experience with trying to extend the sweet spot yourself? I'd love to hear about any attempts that other may have made to capture this...

 

[Faraer]

---

 

[Henry]

A couple of observations by me...

...the talk earlier of "the destiny of Paragon and Epic characters" and the earlier talk of different action points ("These aren't your father's action points") make me think they are adapting Star Wars Destiny mechanics to 4th edition.

...Characters will indeed be weaker on average when compared to 3E equivalents. Their BAB's, skill totals, and world-shaking powers will either be nonexistant, toned down, or received much later than they are now. However, it seems they will receive "differently cool" powers - like they said, move people around the battlefield, do damage where they couldn't before, etc. It looks like the phrase will probably be "weaker, but more resilient." In truth, if they want to alter the "he who loses init, dies" trend of high-level 3E games, it's a good way to go.

 

[FireLance]

I think that power-wise, 4e characters will have lower peaks, but higher plateaus. There will be fewer synergies to exploit, at least in the beginning, before the supplements and options start accumulating again, and since system mastery is no longer a design objective, the power differential between the best option and the worst option will be smaller. The move towards giving all classes at will, per encounter and per day abilities will also mean that the characters' power levels will tend to be constant throughout most of the day, with occasional blips from the use of per day abilities, but the increase in power from per day abilities will not be as great as was possible in 3e.

 

[jdrakeh]

We do have an indirect answer - it was said that levels 1-30 in 4e will correspond to levels (IIRC) 4-15 in 3e. So low level characters will be more powerful than their 3e brothers but high-levels characters will be somewhat weaker.

That makes my day, really. My one long standing criticism of D&D 3x has been that power is gained too easily and that the growth curve for characters is too steep, making long-running campaigns (i.e., campaigns that span decades of game time) a difficult proposition at best. This return to a more prolonged power curve in regard to character growth suits me just fine.

 

[frankthedm]

Toned back damage output and higher HP is how things look for 4E PCs.