D&D 4E Making 4e a bit more dangerous

[sabrinathecat]

That wouldn't work, as elites and solos don't actually gain feats. But powers that give similar abilities might work.

(Last session, my PCs fought a brute with the slayer's Ignore Weakness ability. It was written word-for-word the same too.)

No, but you give them the benefit. It becomes a trait for them.

 

[Neonchameleon]

The rule I play to make 4e more dangerous isn't about reaching 0hp (and having everyone rally round to prevent the CDG). It's that an extended rest takes a long lazy weekend somewhere safe rather than just 8 hours. This means that PCs don't know when or how they are going to get their hit points or healing surges back while not letting things get away from them. It brings back the resource management D&D was built round (and more or less lost as soon as it left the dungeon around 1984).

 

[Warbringer]

The rule I play to make 4e more dangerous isn't about reaching 0hp (and having everyone rally round to prevent the CDG). It's that an extended rest takes a long lazy weekend somewhere safe rather than just 8 hours. This means that PCs don't know when or how they are going to get their hit points or healing surges back while not letting things get away from them. It brings back the resource management D&D was built round (and more or less lost as soon as it left the dungeon around 1984).

Do you put power refresh on the same timeline?

 

[Balesir]

Do you put power refresh on the same timeline?

Not to speak for [MENTION=87792]Neonchameleon[/MENTION], but the extended rest is the vector for both healing surges and Daily (but not Encounter) powers - so, presumably these would both be affected.

I think what 4E failed to do with the extended rest was make it of itself something players wanted to ration. Taking control of the frequency of extended rests as GM is a solution, and one I have used, but it's an inferior solution in my view. A really sound and widely accepted system to make extended resting a balanced and nuanced player decision is something we don't yet have, however.

 

[Warbringer]

Not to speak for [MENTION=87792]Neonchameleon[/MENTION], but the extended rest is the vector for both healing surges and Daily (but not Encounter) powers - so, presumably these would both be affected.

I think what 4E failed to do with the extended rest was make it of itself something players wanted to ration. Taking control of the frequency of extended rests as GM is a solution, and one I have used, but it's an inferior solution in my view. A really sound and widely accepted system to make extended resting a balanced and nuanced player decision is something we don't yet have, however.

I'm interesting in the decoupling of refresh in surges and powers, and was wondering if this was what he had done. I think when they are down in step, you just change the time vector, not the pacing vector, where decoupling the two would cause a pacing change.

There are of course unintended consequences and I was wondering what they would be

 

[Kinak]

It's that an extended rest takes a long lazy weekend somewhere safe rather than just 8 hours.

Of the solutions I've heard, in the conversations about this going back better than a decade, this has long been my favorite.

Switching up the pace so the characters never get eight hours of peace can warp the story and quickly get you into sleep deprevation, but it's reasonable to expect that they don't get, say, a week of peace and quiet until things are under control. It puts things on a more natural timeline.

Similarly, it means that the campaign will naturally extend months, making the rise to power a little less meteoric.

It turns a five minute workday into a five minute workweek, which doesn't sound great, but it's so easy to make a week matter.

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[Neonchameleon]

Do you put power refresh on the same timeline?

Yes

Of the solutions I've heard, in the conversations about this going back better than a decade, this has long been my favorite.

Switching up the pace so the characters never get eight hours of peace can warp the story and quickly get you into sleep deprevation, but it's reasonable to expect that they don't get, say, a week of peace and quiet until things are under control. It puts things on a more natural timeline.

Similarly, it means that the campaign will naturally extend months, making the rise to power a little less meteoric.

It turns a five minute workday into a five minute workweek, which doesn't sound great, but it's so easy to make a week matter.

Cheers!
Kinak

It actually does more than that. "Let's wait here for the rest of the day" is a very different decision from "Let's trek back to the inn for two days, spend a couple of days there, and spend two more days trekking back here". Even if you aren't pressuring people that much it encourages them to push forward and to conserve their resources.

 

[Balesir]

I'm interesting in the decoupling of refresh in surges and powers, and was wondering if this was what he had done. I think when they are down in step, you just change the time vector, not the pacing vector, where decoupling the two would cause a pacing change.

There are of course unintended consequences and I was wondering what they would be

Ah, OK - wit' ya. I think my preferred option would still be to put the pacing more into the players' domain, rather than the GM's (with consequences for slowing down the pace that might be important in certain situations). It might be that there is also some room for "recharging" type powers that recharge on a short rest if a die roll is made (like monster recharge powers, but on a short rest rather than every turn); would that kind of thing address the pacing effects you want to change?

Edit: A major pacing mechanic in 4E is actually experience points, and a link to this might be worth considering. 13th Age has a "campaign loss" mechanic that allows the PCs to retreat (safely) at the cost of having one avenue of progress blocked or having to redo a task in the game; if "premature" extended rests reduce the xp received for the encounters since the previous extended rest, this would have an analogous effect in 4E. The more extended rests the characters take, the more xp budget the GM has to strew their way with difficulties (whether combats or skill challenges), so the players have an incentive to minimise long rests. This is the sort of thing I'm thinking of. Does this address any of your issues, at all?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Yes



It actually does more than that. "Let's wait here for the rest of the day" is a very different decision from "Let's trek back to the inn for two days, spend a couple of days there, and spend two more days trekking back here". Even if you aren't pressuring people that much it encourages them to push forward and to conserve their resources.

But I also think that if you really want to go that route, with extended rest as a week long thing or something like that, I think you should also keep it mind for encounter and adventure design.

A single dungeon for example should not consist of 12 separate encounters. That would probably mean the party would need 3-4 weeks to handle the dungeon, or they fight a lot of very easy encounters, and the former will stretch your disbelief a lot, and the latter will likely be a bit boring.

I would suggest making such scenarios consist of 2-3 really big encounters that go in stages. If we take the dungeon as the example, each encounter would probably consist of engaging the first enemies and those enemies alerting allies - the later encounters representing enemies that set up ambushes and try to stop the PCs from intruding further, and the final one being one where the enemy is holed up, with some secret passages perhaps used for flanking maneuvers (or escape.)

 

[Balesir]

But I also think that if you really want to go that route, with extended rest as a week long thing or something like that, I think you should also keep it mind for encounter and adventure design.

A single dungeon for example should not consist of 12 separate encounters. That would probably mean the party would need 3-4 weeks to handle the dungeon, or they fight a lot of very easy encounters, and the former will stretch your disbelief a lot, and the latter will likely be a bit boring.

I would suggest making such scenarios consist of 2-3 really big encounters that go in stages. If we take the dungeon as the example, each encounter would probably consist of engaging the first enemies and those enemies alerting allies - the later encounters representing enemies that set up ambushes and try to stop the PCs from intruding further, and the final one being one where the enemy is holed up, with some secret passages perhaps used for flanking maneuvers (or escape.)

I have an ongoing "in the background" project right now that is intended for when our current 4E campaign closes out at 30th level: converting the old "Pool of Radiance" adventure/computer game for 4E. "Extended extended rests" (that you have to go back to "civilised" Phlan for) is a house rule I'll probably use. In converting old dungeon encounters to 4E I'm finding that rolling several of them into one "encounter" that is likely to evolve over several rounds of play works pretty well; I'm using lots of minions - having them come in waves I have found is a good practice anyway, so having them start spread around a complex of several rooms and passages that constitutes the "encounter area" is fine - and having around 2-4 "encounter areas" per "dungeon level". Larger encounter areas make tactial play easier, sneak rogues and controllers who eschew area damage effects have an easier time and integrating traps into the encounter is considerably easier. There also seems to be more scope for stealth and scouting in the overall approach to the encounter.

In short, I think this sort of approach could work really well for a classic "dungeon crawl" feel using 4E, and larger, more involved encounter spaces seem like a good idea anyway for 4E.