4e characters vs 3e characters. In Combat!

[Ainamacar]

I've actually co-run a one-shot this way, as the second installment of our "ridiculous campaign." Set in Sigil Prep, it involves the change from 3.5 to 4e...the next "curriculum change." The story involves making peace between the two, which can only be accomplished by going on a quest into the dungeon where all the old curricula died (except many 2nd ed characters now work the cafeteria). Eventually, our mixed 3.5/4 6th level party fought 1st ed monsters. I made approximations between saves and the various non-AC defenses, and basically ruled that any given attack uses the attacker's ruleset. The most challenging character was a schizophrenic cheerleader/bookworm aka 4e bard/3.5 wizard. Some of her magic items were merely nice looking depending on her current personality.

For practical reasons we didn't do a lot of fighting, but at 6th level the two systems had vaguely similar levels of attacking and defensive power. A serious comparison would be really difficult, but I think one could be made to work around this level. Much past that in either direction, the system maths (and spell abilities!) diverge too much.

 

[Nifft]

I've actually co-run a one-shot this way, as the second installment of our "ridiculous campaign." Set in Sigil Prep, it involves the change from 3.5 to 4e...the next "curriculum change." The story involves making peace between the two, which can only be accomplished by going on a quest into the dungeon where all the old curricula died (except many 2nd ed characters now work the cafeteria). Eventually, our mixed 3.5/4 6th level party fought 1st ed monsters. I made approximations between saves and the various non-AC defenses, and basically ruled that any given attack uses the attacker's ruleset. The most challenging character was a schizophrenic cheerleader/bookworm aka 4e bard/3.5 wizard. Some of her magic items were merely nice looking depending on her current personality.

For practical reasons we didn't do a lot of fighting, but at 6th level the two systems had vaguely similar levels of attacking and defensive power. A serious comparison would be really difficult, but I think one could be made to work around this level. Much past that in either direction, the system maths (and spell abilities!) diverge too much.

Is there a story hour of this?

Thanks, -- N

 

[Thasmodious]

I say this is comparing apples to oranges.

The underlying systems are different. There is no objective standard by which they may be compared. There's no logical reason to even claim that one hit point in one system is "worth the same" as a hit point in the other system.

I agree with Umbran. A 4e 1st level character is not more powerful because he has higher hit points, those numbers are relative to the 4e system and not actually "higher". PCs are quite vulnerable in 4e and that never really changes through the level progression, although they have more ways to get themselves or their mates back up and in the fight.

 

[Ainamacar]

Is there a story hour of this?

Thanks, -- N

There is not, but I'll see if I can write one up at some point. No promises, but I'll make sure to leave a post here if I do.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

I've actually co-run a one-shot this way, as the second installment of our "ridiculous campaign." Set in Sigil Prep, it involves the change from 3.5 to 4e...the next "curriculum change." The story involves making peace between the two, which can only be accomplished by going on a quest into the dungeon where all the old curricula died (except many 2nd ed characters now work the cafeteria). Eventually, our mixed 3.5/4 6th level party fought 1st ed monsters. I made approximations between saves and the various non-AC defenses, and basically ruled that any given attack uses the attacker's ruleset. The most challenging character was a schizophrenic cheerleader/bookworm aka 4e bard/3.5 wizard. Some of her magic items were merely nice looking depending on her current personality.

For practical reasons we didn't do a lot of fighting, but at 6th level the two systems had vaguely similar levels of attacking and defensive power. A serious comparison would be really difficult, but I think one could be made to work around this level. Much past that in either direction, the system maths (and spell abilities!) diverge too much.

Seconding the desire for a story hour of this awesomeness!

It reminds me of the "Putting it all together" thread on rpg.net, where someone was trying to run a campaign that would evolve with *every* D&D rulesset from OD&D to 4e, including every TSR/WotC supplement, justifying each change as part of the storyline.

Except this actually happened, rather than slowing down due to the enormity of the project.

 

[Victim]

IME, 4e characters are lot less powerful, especially compared to their opposition, next to 3.x characters. Kobolds and goblins are cleave fodder in 3.5, but fairly comparable to PCs inside an encounter (PCs of course have far more healing surges per day) in 4e. When our group was first making the transition, a frequent complaint was "all the monsters are better than us now" - the PCs seemed to prevail mostly because they had access to healing and the monsters didn't.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

I say this is comparing apples to oranges.

The underlying systems are different. There is no objective standard by which they may be compared. There's no logical reason to even claim that one hit point in one system is "worth the same" as a hit point in the other system.

Pretty much that. Besides, 3E wizard only need a sleep or a color spray to knock the whole 4E team down. As you move through the levels, the disparity provoked by the different mindsets on the building of magic power just makes it ridiculous.

Cheers,

 

[Morrus]

Ok, we all know that 4e characters are far more powerful than their 3.x counterparts.

"All" might be a bit of an exaggeration, because that's not something I know. In fact, I don't even understand how the comparison is made?

3.x and 4E characters are created using entirely different game systems. They aren't comparable. To compare them, you have to recreate a character from one game system in another. In which case, given that the mechanics don't track across, it completely depends on how you choose to reproduce that character in the other game system.

A hit point in one system isn't the same as a hit point in another. A LEVEL isn't the same thing in one system as the other. Drizzt in one system would be a different level in the other. It's a different game.

 

[Dragonbait]

They can't compare. They are very different and if you leave it to comparing the "feel", like others have said: a level 20 mage can solo a CR 20 monster, but a level 20 (or 30) mage in 4E could not solo a monster of the same level. Your original opinion is wrong, then.

Or, why leave out all other systems? Palladium characters, I think, are stronger than 4ed characters but not as strong as 3ed. They have HP surplus, massive amounts of attacks, but they don't have save or die powers. 2ed wizards are stronger with the proliferation of save or die powers that had been removed or changed by 3ed.


My Mutants & Masterminds character can kick both the 3ed and 4ed character's butts. He's the strongest there is.

 

[ashockney]

Do it.