D&D 4E 4ed leveling on gameplay

[xechnao]

I am sorry, I really don't get how leveling isn't part of the gameplay in 4e. Please explain.

See OP.

How a 3rd level encounter will be different from a 9th level encounter gameplay wise? If everything is scaling in a linear way, the goal design is "the sweet spot" and monster roles such as minion, elite or brute can be modelled to fit encounters for every level how will the combat experience be different from one level to the next?

Please do not make general questions that lead to repeating what has been said already in the thread.


Anyway, if BAB's, ACs, Hit Dice, etch... universally scale with level the same way, what meaning do they have if we take into consideration that the game's purpose for players is to be facing encounters appropriate to their level?

If you change design and focus gameplay on class powers and cross-power training while keeping the rest in a linear scalable fashion that make no difference in gameplay, they only seem to be unecessary baggage.

 

[xechnao]

Because players generally want their characters to grow in power at a reasonable rate, and it is helpful for both new and old DMs to have rules dictating that progression.

You could just as easily ask, "Why not skip classes all-together?" It's an iconic part of D&D that doesn't detract from gameplay and provides an easily understandable role.

That was not my point. Of keeping character progression with rules that is. My point is that with the new design approach the leveling rule as of BABs, ACs, etch seems moot.

EDIT: And my initial point (OP) was: what does "grow in power" means regarding combat gameplay in 4th Ed, as far as balanced encounters are considered.

 

[Lackhand]

I may be misinterpreting you, but I think you're saying something like:

At first level, to win my fight against an orc, I needed to roll above an 8 on a twenty sided die six times, while the DM rolled over a 14 no more than five times, assuming average damage.
At tenth level, to win my fight against an orc...ish warband led by their chieftain and his demonic allies, ditto.
Where's the fun?

To which I reply, leveling is all about the set dressing. In terms of gameplay, it's actually advantageous to have the statistics change relatively little over the levels, assuming equal challenges. At tenth level, the lone orc isn't even a speedbump, so you've clearly grown, and what you're doing sounds so much more impressive.

Also, I think the actual mechanics of what you roll, when, may change: more opportunity attacks on both sides, say, result in a same length game for the humans playing it, but fewer rounds for the elves and dwarves in-game.

If leveling actually changed the statistics of when you won and lost against equal foes, the game would quickly become unplayable.

Helps?

 

[xechnao]

I may be misinterpreting you, but I think you're saying something like:


To which I reply, leveling is all about the set dressing. In terms of gameplay, it's actually advantageous to have the statistics change relatively little over the levels, assuming equal challenges. At tenth level, the lone orc isn't even a speedbump, so you've clearly grown, and what you're doing sounds so much more impressive.

Also, I think the actual mechanics of what you roll, when, may change: more opportunity attacks on both sides, say, result in a same length game for the humans playing it, but fewer rounds for the elves and dwarves in-game.

If leveling actually changed the statistics of when you won and lost against equal foes, the game would quickly become unplayable.

Helps?

The fact is that in previous editions leveling seems that it was something more than an aesthetic aspect. It could change combat gameplay from one level to the next in a drastic way regarding not only PCs but also monsters. A 3rd level encounter played significantly different than a 9th level encounter. By what we know of 4th Ed what seems to be touching on this as a ruling is the new rule of tiers. So why not just only keep tiers and tie progression of class powers to them. Mark passing from one tier to the next with specific class powers, campaign and combat events along of which class power aquisition takes place.

Think also of the new rule of cross-training that seems to be beating another purpose of keeping leveling as it was. Gaining powers of a class was profoundly tied to the whole level mechanism in previous editions, but in this edition it seems the mechanics follow a different design path.

 

[LostSoul]

EDIT: And my initial point (OP) was: what does "grow in power" means regarding combat gameplay in 4th Ed, as far as balanced encounters are considered.

Probably two things:

1. More varied tactical choices. Hopefully not too many choices.

2. In-game (in-character, fictional, whatever you want to call it) changes. You gain political power. You can also change the game world, by deposing kings or destroying that lich lord and his hordes of undead.

 

[xechnao]

Probably two things:
1. More varied tactical choices. Hopefully not too many choices.

Heh, so since they stated that there will be no dead levels this sounds like we should be expecting something as a few tactical choices at level 1 and gaining 30 different extra tactical choices by developing to level 30. Sounds crazy, doesn't it?

 

[simply not edible]

Heh, so since they stated that there will be no dead levels this sounds like we should be expecting something as a few tactical choices at level 1 and gaining 30 different extra tactical choices by developing to level 30. Sounds crazy, doesn't it?

Not necessarily. If gaining feats at specific levels, instead of gaining class features, not along with gaining them, and the feats are along the lines of those we have seen, these will not drasticlly improve the number of combat options.

Also, class powers may be improvements over previously gained powers, and thus not entirely new options.

No dead levels does not mean too many tactical choices. It might just mean you see growth in your skills.

As for the original point; the difference will lie in the monsters you can deal with. Running into creature X at level 3 would be near fatal, while meeting him attlevel 9, you could finally emerge victorious.

Also, without the artificial aid of levels, gaining new features would require another, equally artifcial way of getting them. I don't see the difference.

Then again, I may have missed the point being made. It happens, sometimes.

 

[Nahat Anoj]

How do you think leveling will affect gameplay?
How a 3rd level encounter will be different from a 9th level encounter gameplay wise? If everything is scaling in a linear way, the goal design is "the sweet spot" and monster roles such as minion, elite or brute can be modelled to fit encounters for every level how will the combat experience be different from one level to the next?

Options available to them, probably. 9th level PCs will have more things they can do.

Another thing to remember is that, because of the linear scale, low level monsters aren't quite as weak, nor are high level monsters quite as strong, as in previous editions. So a horde of low level mooks is a threat to high level PCs. Conversely, if PCs enlist the aid of townspeople or other allies, they should be able to battle a high level threat. I think that will be a different experience from 3e.

 

[xechnao]

It might just mean you see growth in your skills.

So what does this mean gameplay wise, if it is not reflected by tactical choices?

As for the original point; the difference will lie in the monsters you can deal with. Running into creature X at level 3 would be near fatal, while meeting him attlevel 9, you could finally emerge victorious.

Again different monsters as of their name, or as of the tactics epmloyed?

Also, without the artificial aid of levels, gaining new features would require another, equally artifcial way of getting them. I don't see the difference.

But I see the difference. How about just keeping the rules of class powers and tiers and link them together? Aren't they just enough instead of also keeping track of various garbage such as BABs and ACs which scale in a linear way?

 

[Jack99]

See OP.



Please do not make general questions that lead to repeating what has been said already in the thread.


Anyway, if BAB's, ACs, Hit Dice, etch... universally scale with level the same way, what meaning do they have if we take into consideration that the game's purpose for players is to be facing encounters appropriate to their level?

If you change design and focus gameplay on class powers and cross-power training while keeping the rest in a linear scalable fashion that make no difference in gameplay, they only seem to be unecessary baggage.

I wasn't trying to be snide, I merely didn't get your point based on your original post. Most likely due to a certain language barrier.

The fact is that in previous editions leveling seems that it was something more than an aesthetic aspect. It could change combat gameplay from one level to the next in a drastic way regarding not only PCs but also monsters. A 3rd level encounter played significantly different than a 9th level encounter.

I find it interesting that you speak about changes in combat gameplay from level to level, and give an example with a 6 level difference. Care to show me an example where gameplay radically changes from 1 level to the next?

Also, you state that 4e's powers will not be tied to class level, where do you see that? From what I read, there has been some musings that feats will be tied to tiers, although at this point it is merely just that, based on the 4 feats we have seen (toughness, GWA, etc).

Cheers