D&D 4E 4ed leveling on gameplay

[xechnao]

Amen. I give up since he appears unwilling to accept that his way of expressing himself is not clear to everyone, but I'm glad to see that it's not just me being too mentally challenged to get some clear and obvious point.

See my post#39. Try quoting me there and let me see if I can explain better.

 

[Magus Coeruleus]

See my post#39. Try quoting me there and let me see if I can explain better.

Ok, let me see if I get this--are you saying that in 3e there was increasing complexity with level in the stats and now it's complexity with level from more or more complex exception-based abilities? If so, I'm not sure I see that because I think in 3e it wasn't supposed to be more complex with BAB, AC, etc., but rather just that the math didn't actually work out to have the right kinds of probabilities of success and failure for level-appropriate challenges, whereas in 4e supposedly it will. For the abilities, I was under the impression that they intend to limit the complexity of even the exception-based abilities, or rather the number of them you need to keep track of, at higher levels in 4e. Thus, even though there are more and more feats and talents, etc., I have the idea that they intend to make them less complicated to use so that you don't have an exploding number of options but rather can still reasonably keep track. Ok, I'm stopping here because I may be commenting on an argument while still not having it right. Maybe you could help with a concrete example? For instance, say in 3e a character of level X will do this like so and then at level X=Y will do it this way, whereas in 4e it seems like from level X to level X+Y it will be that way, and you don't see why the same idea couldn't just be implemented in yet this other way.

 

[Oldtimer]

I am talking about the mechanism that produces PC development.

I still really don't understand if that is a yes or no to my suggestion of "accumulate x number of experience points -> advance one level -> receive new cool powers and abilities".

"PC Development" can mean so much more than just increased game statistics - are you talking about character development outside the statistics?

In the BAB vs AC mathematics add in Saves and perhaps everything else found in the standard tables.

OK, this part I get. 4e will attempt to keep the variance of these stats with the game group constant over level 1-30. No more will the Fighter go from 1 point of BAB over the Wizard (at level 1) to 10 points over the Wizard (at level 20). The stat progression is linear with the same incline for all classes. So far, we're in agreement.

Instead 4E produces PC development and variation through a mechanism of special powers, a mechanism of exceptions.

So why does it need to keep tracking of the 3e standard terms all along?

This is where I lose you. The classes in 3e also had special powers (feats, class abilities, skills) that could influence combat. This is not a new mechanism.

The only really new thing is that the distance between the game stats of the characters in the group will no longer increase as they increase in power. I fail to see why that is a reason the abandon the concept of levels...

 

[xechnao]

Ok, let me see if I get this--are you saying that in 3e there was increasing complexity with level in the stats and now it's complexity with level from more or more complex exception-based abilities?

If by stats you mean Saves, BABs(itterative attacks included) and whatever else was in tables that was expressing the development of each class by giving good, medium and bad progressions, then yes. Since 4e gameplay is not build around these variables, but instead it is build on more exceptional -rather than standard variables- then why does it have to keep track of the data of 3e? Just give BABs and ACs one value that will never change and you will never have to keep track of their progression. If you are worried about the comparison among say commoners or BBEGs and PCs regarding these basic stats, I think the minion and solo rules could easily cover you. Then there are the tiers that further emphasize this matter.

 

[xechnao]

This is where I lose you. The classes in 3e also had special powers (feats, class abilities, skills) that could influence combat.

This is not a new mechanism.

In 3e, from a design perspective this was just a feature. The core mechanic of progression was build on stats.

The only really new thing is that the distance between the game stats of the characters in the group will no longer increase as they increase in power. I fail to see why that is a reason the abandon the concept of levels...

By levels I mean the 3e core mechanic of stat progression (By stats I mean BABs etch). If these make no difference in 4e why do we have to keep track of them?

 

[Oldtimer]

In 3e, from a design perspective this was just a feature. The core mechanic of progression was build on stats.

I disagree. For many classes the core mechanic was more about gaining new powers than increases in BAB. Most Wizards and Sorcerers where probably more happy about the new spells they could cast than the +1 BAB they got every other level.

By levels I mean the 3e core mechanic of stat progression (By stats I mean BABs etch). If these make no difference in 4e why do we have to keep track of them?

But they do make a difference in 4e. Just because they have a constant variance within the group over all levels, it doesn't mean that they don't vary outside the group. When fighting a few orcs at a low level, their Will Defence might be a match for your Hold person spell, but when fighting a mob of orcs at a high level, that same spell takes out an orc almost without rolling. So I basically disagree with your suggestion that "these make no difference in 4e".

 

[Irda Ranger]

You can just say, to play in this campaign you need X powers.

Um, how is that different than picking a level? If you know what powers the quest requires, and you know what level you get them at - "This quest requires being Level X." No need to be all complicated and reinvent the wheel.

If you are so committed to quest requirements you could introduce mini challenges to each player or to the party and see how they cope with it before being recruited for such a quest and adjust what you feel.

Huh? I don't need to run mini-challenges to know what a Frost Giant will wipe the floor with 3rd level PC's. All I'm saying is "This quest has Frost Giants you may need to fight. Be level X." What possible purpose would mini-challenges serve?

BTW, what is the H7 game?

Nothing official. I just picked the letter H based on the Heroic Tier and the number 7 as a good number about 3/4 up from the bottom of that Tier. It had a nice ring to it.

 

[xechnao]

I disagree. For many classes the core mechanic was more about gaining new powers than increases in BAB. Most Wizards and Sorcerers where probably more happy about the new spells they could cast than the +1 BAB they got every other level.

Yes, but spell progress was in theory build by being valued against these stat bonuses. To get my point see how PrC and their prequisites were modeled so to be balanced.

But they do make a difference in 4e. Just because they have a constant variance within the group over all levels, it doesn't mean that they don't vary outside the group. When fighting a few orcs at a low level, their Will Defence might be a match for your Hold person spell, but when fighting a mob of orcs at a high level, that same spell takes out an orc almost without rolling. So I basically disagree with your suggestion that "these make no difference in 4e".

IMO with minion-solo amd tier rules you are good to go. If you have progressed enough those orcs that were elite for you at the time they are nothing more than minions right now

 

[xechnao]

Um, how is that different than picking a level?

By not having to keep track of the stats 3e levels come with.

 

[Irda Ranger]

By levels I mean the 3e core mechanic of stat progression (By stats I mean BABs etch). If these make no difference in 4e why do we have to keep track of them?

They still make a difference. You're not just learning new tricks; you're getting better at the tricks you know.

More to the point, it sounds to me like you're trying to fix something that ain't broken. Most people like earning their way to Level X. It's a shorthand for "I've fought this many battles; I can do these cool things." etc.