D&D 4E 4ed leveling on gameplay

[Incenjucar]

:\

The level-based system is less complicated than the alternative, but does not detract from anything. Further, big numbers have an aesthetic value, whether you think it should or no. If I do 5000 damage instead of 5 damage, it tends to feel better, even if it's the same percentage using different systems. Higher numbers also provide more flexibility, because between 0 and 5000, you have a much greater ranger than between 0 and 5. The main reason not to go even higher than we have currently is because I'm not rolling a damned d5000 without a gun to my head.

Less-complicated+just as fun or better=WIN

 

[Henry]

Further, big numbers have an aesthetic value, whether you think it should or no. If I do 5000 damage instead of 5 damage, it tends to feel better, even if it's the same percentage using different systems. Higher numbers also provide more flexibility, because between 0 and 5000, you have a much greater ranger than between 0 and 5. The main reason not to go even higher than we have currently is because I'm not rolling a damned d5000 without a gun to my head.

Less-complicated+just as fun or better=WIN

The "more fun" of higher numbers do have a cost in ease of use at the table. How long does it take you to find out how many of your 25 hit points you have left if I hit you for 8? How long does it take you to find out how many of your 4,533 hit points you have left if I hit you for 958? That's why our group rarely played above 10th level or so, in ANY edition: We just didn't feel like playing around with handfuls of dice at one time as a standard rule. It was fun for one-time or once per session effects, but the more you have to do it, the more it slips from fun to work, for me.

 

[Henry]

Why not be done with stats allready by giving just one table of unified rolls in PH (for example Basic saves and Basic attack bonuses everyone is supposed to have all the time) and just go on with noting class powers?

Furthermore have minion, elite ...etch rules as a standard table that notes bonuses or penalties. Thus each monster could have a version of a minion, elite or whatever as the DM chooses without taking space in the books for every version of every monster.

Do you mean something like Spycraft's tables for NPCs?

 

[simply not edible]

This thread is probably on the edge of death, but anyways, here I go.

In post #44:

Just give BABs and ACs one value that will never change and you will never have to keep track of their progression.

They've done this. Now, instead of being anywhere between ½-level and full (or even lower then half if yo have a DM that doesn't use fractional attack bonuses), it's at ½ your character level. What level am I? Level 8? Good, BAB, Saves, AC +4. Done. No need to look it up anywhere.

Furthermore, as I've already stated earlier, this:

Why not just tie powers to experience points directly and furthermore to campaign progress in a way that seems natural to pass from one tier to the next?

Especially when combined with this:

For example just have to write down promotion names such as minion, expert, elite, champion for PCs.

You see this? This is what we call leveling. All you are doing is removing the numbers, and changing it into names.

Now, until you fix these things so I can see an actual point where you definitely state what else yo would mean in an obvious, simple way, I consider ourselves to be in agreement on a mechanical standpoint, and the discussion to come from a simple misunderstanding on my side, and thus a waste of time.

 

[xechnao]

Do you mean something like Spycraft's tables for NPCs?

Yes but instead of focusing on stats, have them focus on the 4e core design's base (powers, xencounter...at will use of powers, tiers, minions...solos etch)

So let's say that generally there should be 3 types of encounters: easy ones, normal ones and hard ones. Now make rules to help DMs create whatever encounter they like in a similar logic with the HERO system on PC creation.
For example:
1) cross-reference the balance of xencounter powers of each side. The chart's input data take into consideration the number, power and reliability of xencounter powers.
2) cross-reference the balance of at will powers.
3) cross-reference the balance of xday powers.
These steps are done to analyze reliability. Calculate the overall balance of each side's powers, overall reliability and strategic points.
Strategic points are the tactical balance against reliability and for example are:
-length of the encounter (attrition): things like balance of numbers, staying power like morale checks, controller subjectiveness (things like wizard powers or challenges).
-other environmental challenges that demand mobility and/or role synergy.
-things like tactical logistics-resources: for example you may want to keep risks equal for every character or you may want some characters to risk more than others

Reliability dictates how random or streamlined a power is.

 

[Rallek]

The ideas brought up by the OP seem, in my opinion, to have a great deal of merit. The implied mechanics seem both simple and elegant, and I will certainly give a great deal of thought to building/modifying a system based on these ideas for my next campaign (my group has just started an E6 game).



Kudos to you Sir (or Madam)!

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Furthermore have minion, elite ...etch rules as a standard table that notes bonuses or penalties. Thus each monster could have a version of a minion, elite or whatever as the DM chooses without taking space in the books for every version of every monster.

I think you are missing the point of Minions, Regular, Elite and Solo monsters here.
There isn't a Minion Goblin for 1st level characters and an Elite Goblin for 5th level characters.
Instead, all of the Minion to Elite creatures are tied to basically one specific level. Their base statistics/modifiers (attacks & defense) are probably the same, but a Minion seems to be a simple creature that can maybe do one or two combat tricks, and can be dealt with swiftly.
8(or was it 15?) Goblin Minions might provide a reasonable challenge for 5 1st level PCs. A regular Goblin will have a little more staying power and 4 will challenge 5 1st level PCs. An Elite Goblin is the crop of the cream, and he has more staying power and more attack options, possibly even the ability to recover from injuries in mid-combat or directly react to enemy attacks, or he can attack multiple enemies at once (maybe a spellcaster?). 2 Elite Goblins would be a challenge for 1st level PCs.
There probably won't be a "Solo Goblin", but if there was he would be a real powerhouse - lots of hit points, several attacks and debilitating effects, and a single one of them can challenge a group of 5 1st level PCs.

In D&D 3.5 terms, take a normal Hill Giant as a regular creature for its CR. Add one head to the creature, and give him one extra attack at full attack bonus and Combat Reflexes, add 50 % hit points, and it would become an "Elite Hill Giant " (probably called "Ettin").

----------------
Levels in 4E indicate the "base statistics" for most things (base attack bonus, base skill bonus, base defense bonus). In addition, every time you level, you gain some kind of new ability. It might be just a further bonus to a certain type of check (Skill, attack, damage), or it gives you a new option in combat (or possible replacing an older option with a new, improved one.) Levels represent "chunks of advancement". They ensure that you don't over-specialise your advancement in a single area. (So you don't have a Wizard that casts fireballs, but still hasn't more than 5 hit points and a Reflex Defense of 11).

Furthermore, they allow you to determine your relative strength to others, most notably monsters and NPCs. If you have only 3-4 degrees of separation, you can't make a lot of disinction between a Goblin and a Bugbear, or a Ogre and a Hill Giant. Your relative advancement would be sudden - Goblins used to be a dangerous threat for the past 20 game sessions, but last sessions, they are speed bumps and Fire Giants are suddenly the most dangerous opposition.

 

[xechnao]

I think you are missing the point of Minions, Regular, Elite and Solo monsters here.
There isn't a Minion Goblin for 1st level characters and an Elite Goblin for 5th level characters.
Instead, all of the Minion to Elite creatures are tied to basically one specific level. Their base statistics/modifiers (attacks & defense) are probably the same, but a Minion seems to be a simple creature that can maybe do one or two combat tricks, and can be dealt with swiftly.

Are you sure? In 3e you could add NPC levels to every monster and make it as powerful as you want. It made sense that if there was a possibility for human PCs to make it to level 20, so it was for hobgoblins. So does 4e lack totaly this feature and use levels to strictly indicate the hierarchy of races in PoL or is it your idea of excuse of why 4e has kept leveling on stats the way 3e did?

 

[simply not edible]

It's been announced that monster cration doesn't use the same rules as character creation. This has been stated in Worlds & Monsters, amongst other places. They are no longer built using HD, so I would guess that adding class levels would require a couple of jumps and fixes. Also, the phrase "an army of elves is largely made up of nonclassed soldiers." (W&M, pg. 13) goes a bit further in making this point, as wll as suggesting that NPC classes are gone.

Instead, monsters are now built around the level where the characters should be meeting them, with, if I interpreted the info correctly, different variants of the same creature to fill different roles or to be met at different levels.

And, thanks to the new leveling mechanic, where every character gains new options of every level, which apparently are of the same type across the board (lvl. 3? Feat. Lvl. 4? New daily and at will options), and the new combat system, built around several cratures and/or terrain features (let's not forget the traps, lava-pools, and other such things that have been mentioned with respect to encounter design) this whole thing:

1) cross-reference the balance of xencounter powers of each side. The chart's input data take into consideration the number, power and reliability of xencounter powers.
2) cross-reference the balance of at will powers.
3) cross-reference the balance of xday powers.
These steps are done to analyze reliability. Calculate the overall balance of each side's powers, overall reliability and strategic points.
Strategic points are the tactical balance against reliability and for example are:
-length of the encounter (attrition): things like balance of numbers, staying power like morale checks, controller subjectiveness (things like wizard powers or challenges).
-other environmental challenges that demand mobility and/or role synergy.
-things like tactical logistics-resources: for example you may want to keep risks equal for every character or you may want some characters to risk more than others

seems to have been done for you. Except for maybe that last point, which would then be the only thing for the DM to worry about.

And as far as I'm concerned, for encounter design, I'd rather have the thinking out and balancing done for me than hav to do it myself. I'm busy enough as is. Of course, if yo like the balancing act, there's no-one to stop you from doing just that.

 

[xechnao]

Instead, monsters are now built around the level where the characters should be meeting them, with, if I interpreted the info correctly, different variants of the same creature to fill different roles or to be met at different levels.

But if this be the case in each campaign you will not just be facing the same, you will also be facing the same in the same order.

EDIT: what about the knowledge skill in this case? Why should a PC take it if he knows what exactly he should be expecting?