D&D 3E/3.5 1e-3e vs. 4e: The inverted difficulty curve in D&D 5e design

[KarinsDad]

If I may say this about 4e.. this was part of why I think the math fix feats were a mistake. There were so many power bonuses, at that point that they were unnecessary.

I think the math fix feats were necessary for those groups that could not get consistent power bonuses. I think that power bonuses are too high to begin with. I think that monster damage was always too low and even the fix was too low. I think that monster options were too limited. PCs have more than a dozen options each going into an encounter at low Epic, but monsters have 3 each. If they are only going to have 3 each (to keep it simple for the DM), then those 3 options should be more awesome than the PC's basic options (not necessarily more awesome than the PC's Daily options).

All in all, I think that the math and the power of effects was never balanced to begin with. If there is anything that I hope they do with 5E, it's to create a set of meta-game design rules for designers so that the game doesn't spiral off into a curve (either easier or harder) at some levels because a game designer doesn't know what the heck he is doing and doesn't have guidelines to do it properly like what happened in 4E. There are first level Daily powers that should be 15th level Daily powers and these were not introduced when 4E was brand new, but introduced when 4E was out for a year and designers should have known better by then.

 

[Dragonblade]

I observe the exact opposite.

Low level is harder and that's when PCs can die the easiest.

Once past 5th level, 4E becomes a piece of cake and gets easier and easier due to the vast plethora of options that become available. I'm never threatened in Paragon or Epic as a player.

Could you give some examples to support your POV?

Well yes and no. I meant the design intent was there to reverse the power curve and to some extent they succeeded when you compare 4e to prior editions.

But I don't think WotC anticipated the unforeseen synergy bonuses that comes in at high level play with so many options and powers interacting in unforeseen ways. I personally am a fan of the emergent complexity that came from high level power combos in 4e. I think the tactics and strategies it engenders makes the game more enjoyable to me.

But yes, in practice the monsters as they were originally designed did too little damage and had too few HP to be the challenge they needed to be at higher levels. Essentials and post MM3 monster design did help remedy this some. You can see the intent in the design, though.

Playing a 1st level PC in 4e is actually enjoyable for me. The first edition of the game I can say that for. The amount of options available and the level of threat faced is at the level I intuitively expect it should be at. Whereas in earlier editions, I hated playing or running low level games with a passion. I found the lack of options for a low level PC in 1e-3e equal parts boring and limiting. And when combined with the fragility of those low level PCs, the game always became an exercise in frustration.

 

[Li Shenron]

I'm fine with higher lethality at low levels. It has always given me a feeling that the fantasy world is not adjusting itself around our characters, holding punches against rookies and unleashing hell against veterans. It feels more natural that low-level characters are afraid to die because it's actually quite possible, while once you've done your adventuring job for years and years you're less afraid of that and more afraid that you won't succeed at stopping that villain from taking over the world or that mad wizard to open the gates of hell.

I do think that a high-level game is more complex therefore more difficult. It's just another type of difficulty. At low-level your most common concern is hitting someone with a weapon, and using equipment and the environment to your advantage. At high-level you have many more things to watch out for even just in combat, once you consider the variety of powers and abilities that your opponents may or may not have. Plus, the chance of dying is still very much there anyway, and it is more painful to die after building up your PC for months or years of gameplay.

 

[Number48]

I have to disagree with OP on his premise. 4E is easy at all levels, going by the book. It was probably the first time in D&D that the assumption is that the heroes are going to win every fight, every time.

In 3E, your patience in crafting a character over time is rewarded. In a video game experience, you are actually punished for doing well in a sense. But video games last a matter of hours and are over.