Something that 4e's designers overlooked? -aka is KM correct?

Garthanos · Apr 29, 2010

Kamikaze Midget said:
I think it's safe to say that your experience, if this was your experience, was distinctly anomalous. 4e isn't the first edition of D&D to have workable rules for 1st level PC's. In fact, it's the 4th (or 5th or 6th depending on how you slice an "edition").

Depends on what you consider workable..

Of passed editions I only played AD&D ... Not only dont you start a hero it was pretty explicit with experience points being many times more plentiful if you were inclined to be a coward and sneak thief that "fighting evil" was not only ultra dangerous it was out right disapproved behavior.

The hero of AD&D might have been a post 60s nerd identification hero... "fighting" is bad "see the war" ... and "wizards" will rule the world... once they do there time getting sand kicked in there face.

At least in personality and style wise your character needed to act like a sneaky frightened greedy character or end up meat on a platter fast.

I dont think there is anything technically wrong with that but it isnt heroic by my standards.

JoeGKushner · Apr 29, 2010

Odhanan said:
Sure.
See AD&D Player's Handbook, Cleric entry, p.20, Level 1 Title: Acolyte.
Ibid., Magic-User entry, p.25, Level 1 Title: Prestidigitator.

These are people from the mundane world who are first stepping in the extraordinary world.

As for the fighter, at Level 1 he is a Veteran, thereby implying that it is a person from the mundane world who has seen combat before. He too is stepping for the first time in the realm of the extraordinary. The Thief is a Rogue, an Apprentice. Same thing.

So the people who can cast magic, especially the cleric who has a tie to the gods, are from the 'mundane' world?

Gotcha.

But I suppose it's kinda standard to think about the half-orc assassin sitting around the farm dreaming of the day he'll get to [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vm9rSqx2FgY"]kill the king[/ame].

FireLance · Apr 29, 2010

Odhanan said:
Sure.
See AD&D Player's Handbook, Cleric entry, p.20, Level 1 Title: Acolyte.
Ibid., Magic-User entry, p.25, Level 1 Title: Prestidigitator.

These are people from the mundane world who are first stepping in the extraordinary world.

As for the fighter, at Level 1 he is a Veteran, thereby implying that it is a person from the mundane world who has seen combat before. He too is stepping for the first time in the realm of the extraordinary. The Thief is a Rogue, an Apprentice. Same thing.

I think that in many campaigns, the line between the mundane and the extraordinary is not so clearly drawn. Low-level characters may find themselves facing opponents no different from those which a "Veteran" 1st-level fighter would have fought in the past. Mechanically, the fact that Acolytes and Prestigitators start out with the ability to cast spells on a daily basis means that they have already taken their first steps out of the mundane world even before play has begun (unless you consider 1st-level spells to be "mundane"). Finally, although it is neither encouraged nor implied by the rules, some players may describe how the fantastic world has already touched their characters' lives in their backstories (ideally, with the knowledge and consent of their DMs). These may include prophecies and omens, encounters with magical creatures, locations, objects and effects, and perhaps even actual adventures.

Hence, while I do agree that 1st-level characters in 4E are assumed to be generally more competent and knowledgeable than their counterparts in earlier editions, I do not believe that the difference (in narrative terms, at least) is significant.

xechnao · Apr 29, 2010

Kamikaze Midget said:
I don't think 4e's combat roles mean any sort of inherent risk-taking or option-making is lost. I do think that 4e mostly focuses tightly on individual encounters, and that a lot can be gained from widening the focus out to include the context in which those encounters occur.

Part of this means that encounters become subordinate to the flow of the adventure/dungeon, which means some encounters would probably be riskier than others, and deciding between options in play may affect which encounters you ultimately deal with, and which ones you avoid.

But how can the two be compatible? If your game engine is based on "daily resources" roles -instead of encounter roles- , resources that are expandable or risked at different ways, I can see dungeon options having a point. One player may want to risk in way A while another player may risk in way B -depending on their characters. Negotiating through this is what I am talking about. It is not about winning a specific combat or encounter: it is most generic dealing with players' place and position within a dungeon or adventure. Encounters just make part of it. Now, if you separate encounters from this, to say that in each encounter everyone is supposed to contribute in a balanced way, so as encounters have equal costs and risks for each player, this negotiation is lost.

xechnao · Apr 29, 2010

Garthanos said:
I dont think there is anything technically wrong with that but it isnt heroic by my standards.

Yeah but it is easier to identify with and roleplay with because us, humans are generally like that. Besides, in D&D players do not want to kill and be killed: they just want to gain the levels so that they "rule the game" or the "campaign" or the "adventure" so to speak.

Except if by heroic you mean kickass. That players just want to kill monsters, just to kick ass. Sure, giving the players the power to kick ass can be fun but wont it become old soon enough? On the contrary, if the game is such that forces players to constantly be alert while they play, rarely having the comfort of given and standard "old" winning methods "just because they can", playing the game remains interesting -instead of learning the rules to win or put it another way: the winning rules (which may be good for selling books to some people but bad for making a truly worthwhile game). Remember that D&D is a game: not fiction, not a deck building exercise.

Coldwyn · Apr 29, 2010

xechnao said:
But how can the two be compatible? If your game engine is based on "daily resources" roles -instead of encounter roles- , resources that are expandable or risked at different ways, I can see dungeon options having a point. One player may want to risk in way A while another player may risk in way B -depending on their characters. Negotiating through this is what I am talking about. It is not about winning a specific combat or encounter: it is most generic dealing with players' place and position within a dungeon or adventure. Encounters just make part of it. Now, if you separate encounters from this, to say that in each encounter everyone is supposed to contribute in a balanced way, so as encounters have equal costs and risks for each player, this negotiation is lost.

I think you´re underestimating 4E there. It has its own inbuild risk-vs-reward minigame, but that only comes into play a bit later. When you reach paragon level and upgrade action point use to paragon action points, as well as aquire rings and have some magic items, you´ve got to balance rests and reaching milestones against each other, as well as conserve dailies and magic item powers.

Here the question is: How lang can we (the party) continue onwards to gain action points and reach milestones until we´ve run out of resorces? How many rests can we afford and reset action points and milestones?

Bluenose · Apr 29, 2010

Odhanan said:
Sure.
See AD&D Player's Handbook, Cleric entry, p.20, Level 1 Title: Acolyte.
Ibid., Magic-User entry, p.25, Level 1 Title: Prestidigitator.

These are people from the mundane world who are first stepping in the extraordinary world.

As for the fighter, at Level 1 he is a Veteran, thereby implying that it is a person from the mundane world who has seen combat before. He too is stepping for the first time in the realm of the extraordinary. The Thief is a Rogue, an Apprentice. Same thing.

What those names suggest certainly isn't the boy fresh off a farm. They might not be used to operating without supervision (commanders for the less experiences fighters, masters for the apprentice wizard, etc.) but they're still trained and competent at what they do. I'd suggest that in practice those titles make it plain that you aren't going from farm-boy to hero in 1st edition AD&D, and probably not in any version without extra rules such as the 0th level character rules that occasionally appeared.

Mark · Apr 29, 2010

Some people seem to be taking the term "farm boy" a bit too literally.

JoeGKushner · Apr 29, 2010

Mark said:
Some people seem to be taking the term "farm boy" a bit too literally.

Perhaps but that might be because it's a popular device in fiction ranging from good old Superman whose parents were often depicted as farmers to those in fantasy fiction who were kitchen boys.

Even here when people are talking about low power, they're tlaking about 'mundane' when people communicate with the gods or can cast magic and are NOW going to enter the world.

If people mean low powered, say low powered. If people mean low magic, say it. The more clearly ideas are communicated, the easier it is to have actual discussion instead of going, "that's not what I meant". It's the internets. Communication is a bitch to begin with.

Odhanan · Apr 29, 2010

JoeGKushner said:
So the people who can cast magic, especially the cleric who has a tie to the gods, are from the 'mundane' world?

Gotcha.

Now you're just ignoring my point completely and making fun of it. Fine by me.

You were saying earlier that you saw "a lot of people confusing that whole farmer brown thing with every possible starting character". What I am seeing, personally, is a lot of people who are taking things WAY too literally.

No reason to go on under these conditions, since I'm not willing to engage into hair-splitting matches. /out

Something that 4e's designers overlooked? -aka is KM correct?

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight

JoeGKushner

First Post

FireLance

Legend

xechnao

First Post

xechnao

First Post

Coldwyn

First Post

Bluenose

Adventurer

Mark

CreativeMountainGames.com

JoeGKushner

First Post

Odhanan

Adventurer

Similar Threads