D&D 4E 4e: Death of the Bildungsroman

[AndrewRogue]

To be vaguely critical of this thread in general, isn't the very concept of the bildungsroman one that is more closely linked to personal growth (in the emotional and spiritual sense, really), rather than an issue of effective power level?

Really, unless I'm mistaken (and it is possible, as my literary focus is medieval, so I've been out of normal literary criticism for a while), you could have a bildungsroman that stars a level 28 hero with all the equivilant abilities; his personal growth (as opposed to the growth of his abilities) is what actually defines the bildungsroman. So, really, this is an issue of RP and RP alone.

Which, in turn, really isn't an issue. 1st level 4th Ed PCs are, effectively, equivilant to 1st level 3rd Ed PCs. It is just that some of the general numbers have been shifted to allow for a level of mechanical competency. Kobolds, Goblins and Skeletons? They are still all significant threats to the PCs. It is just that they are no longer threats in the sense that your character accidentally dies because the kobold managed to roll max damage on his short spear once.

 

[two]

If you want to start your players out weak, then start 'em weak. Many 3.x players started at 3rd level specifically because they wanted to avoid the Bildungsroman effect (heck, the "you meet over beers in a tavern" intro to a campaign is a cliche specifically because many people want to skip the Bildungsroman part and get right to being heroes and smashing things). These people didn't whine about how weak 1st level characters were, they just took steps to counteract it and went merrily along. If you want to go the other way and put in some houserules to re-introduce Bildungsroman, then nobody's going to stop you (except, possibly, your players).

The question is, then, are you so arrogant to think that if people don't hew to your chosen style of game they're doing it wrong, and therefore the choice of the 4E designers to skip Bildungsroman is bad, or are you just whining about the lack of something you can easily bring back in?

Thanks for all the interesting and mostly polite responses; except for the above, and Hong's, of course, which are (as required by contract) beside the point.

For the responder above: yes of course I can start them weak in 4e, I just don't want to be obliged to create house rules to do this.

3e start weak = level 1
3e start not so weak = level 3
4e start weak = level ?
4e start not so weak = level 1

And yes, yes, you have figured me out.

I'm the guy in the corner who is "so arrogant to think that if people don't hew to your chosen style of game they're doing it wrong, and therefore the choice of the 4E designers to skip Bildungsroman is bad, or are you just whining about the lack of something you can easily bring back in?"

I was sooo trying to hide this, but you saw through my obfuscations. Nuts.

 

[hong]

4e start weak = level ?

Halve hit points. Done.

 

[hong]

To be vaguely critical of this thread in general, isn't the very concept of the bildungsroman one that is more closely linked to personal growth (in the emotional and spiritual sense, really), rather than an issue of effective power level?

Really, unless I'm mistaken (and it is possible, as my literary focus is medieval, so I've been out of normal literary criticism for a while), you could have a bildungsroman that stars a level 28 hero with all the equivilant abilities; his personal growth (as opposed to the growth of his abilities) is what actually defines the bildungsroman. So, really, this is an issue of RP and RP alone.

Indeed. The conflation of personal growth and stat progression is a convenient conceit if you want to justify level grind in a narrative sense, but it isn't one that is tied to any particular level span.

 

[two]

I'm worried that the OP may be doomed to a great deal of disappointment with D&D in general, because no edition of D&D has ever supported Bildungsroman as part of the default setup. (Some attempts at level 0 have come close, but since that may still exist in 4E for all we know, it is not relevant to the discussion, which has up until now been specifically aimed at use of first level characters.)

A first level fighter is not a farmer stepping off the farm for the first time. He is proficient and trained in almost every single weapon and armour type known to man with the exception of a few, mostly oddball weapons that most soldiers would never touch. He can go toe-to-toe with critters that kill the peasants around him, and slaughter them in one blow, or in some cases more than one with a single blow!

A first level wizard has completed their apprenticeship, and is ready to set out into the great wide world to make a name for themselves. They have gone past the cantrips they struggled to master while they were mere apprentices, and have learned actual spells, spells capable of killing a man in one cast (magic missile), or killing a roomful of peasants (burning hands). No wizard in his right mind teaches that sort of spell to a raw apprentice.

A first level rogue is no raw orphan learning to pickpocket - he has mastered the basics of a variety of skills and has even learned where to strike a target for maximum, lethal effect. That's no rank amateur.

And first level clerics have progressed far enough in their training and faith that when they call upon their god for aid, they get a bona-fide act of divine intervention, even if it is just healing a wound! How many peasants can do that?

All of them have one thing in common - they have progressed past the need for an active and protective mentor. They even have starting equipment far beyond what any peasant might be expected to possess, so not only are they trained, they're also adequately equipped.

D&D is not, and never has been, a game where first level characters are the untrained everyday farmer/scullion/orphan central to the Bildungsroman genre. They are the militia member, the skillful pickpocket, the fresh graduate from the temple or the academy. They are already past the need for a full-time mentor, and have reached the point where they need real-world experience to hone their abilities and broaden their repertoire of abilities.

Yes, their power level is low compared to many of the threats they will need to rise to meet, and they may be near the bottom of the food chain for now, but they are no longer everymen.

So 4E will need level 0 rules to even come close to a Bildungsroman. If they don't exist, then house rules will be required, since third party supplements are forbidden from including rules that explain how to level up characters.

This might be true as far as the fluff. It wasn't true as far as many games were played (mine and others I have seen).

Meaning, give a street-wise urchin on the street a dagger and this equates, roughly, to a Rogue1. Joe from the farm with a borrowed sword and some training from crazy cousin Coots was a fighter1.

When my players thought about PC backgrounds, they didn't have to invent crazy situations to explain the ever-zotting finger-of-death wizards; instead they sketched a fellow who found a dusty tome in the attic and read what should not have been read...and couldn't leave well enough alone...

In play, 1st level felt weak. Abilities were minor and easily explained by background. Death was around the corner.

That might not be what the PH or DMG said a Rogue1 or Fighter1 was, but it sure worked as a concept. It felt right, and it played right.

This won't feel right or play right in 4e. Zapping spells all day; doing clever Paladin or Fighter tricks at level 1; teleporting for various races; etc. In fact, for all I know, the PHB or DMG might be explicitly state that bildungsroman is the preferred style of 4e, and that in their view the new 1st level supports the "farmer off the farm" "urchin from the streets" beginning to PC life. But I won't buy it.

 

[two]

Halve hit points. Done.

I can do better.

1/4 hit points.

No, 1/8 hit points.

What about 1 hit point? PC's as minions?

Hm... I am onto something here.

But no, that's not the point, as you know. Even with 1/4 hit points the 4e level 1 PC's will just be heroes made of cardboard. The problem isn't the hit points, it's all the crazy wild zotty tricky stuff they can already do at level 1.

 

[hong]

I can do better.

1/4 hit points.

No, 1/8 hit points.

What about 1 hit point? PC's as minions?

Hm... I am onto something here.

But no, that's not the point, as you know. Even with 1/4 hit points the 4e level 1 PC's will just be heroes made of cardboard. The problem isn't the hit points, it's all the crazy wild zotty tricky stuff they can already do at level 1.

Which is nothing compared to the crazy wild zotty tricky stuff they'll beable to do at the end of 30 levels of grind. Presumably they'll also have learned something about their place in the world along the way, while adding to their collection of crazy wild zotty tricky stuff.

 

[two]

To be vaguely critical of this thread in general, isn't the very concept of the bildungsroman one that is more closely linked to personal growth (in the emotional and spiritual sense, really), rather than an issue of effective power level?

Really, unless I'm mistaken (and it is possible, as my literary focus is medieval, so I've been out of normal literary criticism for a while), you could have a bildungsroman that stars a level 28 hero with all the equivilant abilities; his personal growth (as opposed to the growth of his abilities) is what actually defines the bildungsroman. So, really, this is an issue of RP and RP alone.

Which, in turn, really isn't an issue. 1st level 4th Ed PCs are, effectively, equivilant to 1st level 3rd Ed PCs. It is just that some of the general numbers have been shifted to allow for a level of mechanical competency. Kobolds, Goblins and Skeletons? They are still all significant threats to the PCs. It is just that they are no longer threats in the sense that your character accidentally dies because the kobold managed to roll max damage on his short spear once.

In the fantasy GENRE, very few novels start with the protagonist at level 28 of power.

In fact, none do that I ever read. I'm sure they exist. They just are rather outside the norm (not that that is a bad thing; but I'm looking at the norm here).

It's part of the fantasy bildungsroman genre to feature a generally powerless or weak protagonist who becomes powerful over time (via adventures) and who grows/matures while this happens.

I'm not convinced 4e supports this sort of thing that well. 1st level in 4e may well be exactly equivalent to 1st level in 3e (regarding how often PC's die); but to me they don't = equivalent, given 4e's crash-boom-bang abilities starting at level 1, which make the bildungsroman theme hard to swallow.

 

[hong]

In the fantasy GENRE, very few novels start with the protagonist at level 28 of power.

But very, very many start with the protagonist at a decent power level, and only incrementally becoming more powerful. Character development is not the same as level grind.

 

[two]

Which is nothing compared to the crazy wild zotty tricky stuff they'll beable to do at the end of 30 levels of grind. Presumably they'll also have learned something about their place in the world along the way, while adding to their collection of crazy wild zotty tricky stuff.

Great.

It will make the crazy wild zotty tricky stuff (from level 1) lovers happy.

I'd like to see crazy wild zotty tricky stuff (from level 5) or so.

(learning along the way, of course, growing, exploring, discovering that it's not that smart to sniff open containers of pepper, the best way to settle an argument between washerwomen, the spot on a giant fire beetle where the carapace is weak, best methods for burping baby, the preferred method of warming a post-prandial brandy in a large snifter, etc.)