70% is the Sweet, ain't it?

[Wulf Ratbane]

But... If this mythical "sweet spot" is merely mathematically driven (such as 50% or 70%), and constant with level-appropriate challenges, what is really the point of levelling?

New things, and old things at a greater magnitude.

 

[Frostmarrow]

But... If this mythical "sweet spot" is merely mathematically driven (such as 50% or 70%), and constant with level-appropriate challenges, what is really the point of levelling?

Beats me. I have actually suggested they should get rid of levels (in order to sell more adventures) here on ENWorld.

I got hammered.

 

[KarinsDad]

But... If this mythical "sweet spot" is merely mathematically driven (such as 50% or 70%), and constant with level-appropriate challenges, what is really the point of levelling?

To stay slightly ahead of new challenges which will be higher level as well.

 

[Remathilis]

Sooo, wait a minute. Scientifically we have the most fun when we have to roll a 7 or higher to hit a monster or NPC. What? Where is this from?

No no no. Not roll a 7+ to hit, roll a 3+ to hit. (30% miss chance = 70% hit chance)

As to the scaling of 70%, I don't think it will be so clear cut. I think it will probably work out to...

Baseline (raw number, bab vs. defense) =50% success ratio
Normal (with ability mods, common feats) =60% success
Optimized (uber archers, weapon masters, lots of feats and talents) = 70% success.

that would be fine for me.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

No no no. Not roll a 7+ to hit, roll a 3+ to hit. (30% miss chance = 70% hit chance)

Huh?

 

[JRR_Talking]

Huh?

we use d10's to attack in 4e. Are u not in a playtest group????

 

[Kmart Kommando]

Iron Heroes already has the Armor as DR and Class Defense, and it works out fairly well, when taken in account with the attack challenges. Lowering total attack bonus to account for magic buffs and it should be good to go for 4e. Or just yoink it from IH and skip all those buff spells, they were an annoyance that took over the 3e game anyway.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

But... If this mythical "sweet spot" is merely mathematically driven (such as 50% or 70%), and constant with level-appropriate challenges, what is really the point of levelling?

The monsters you fight change. A lot.

At 1st level, you had a 70% chance to hit an Orc, and probably survive your encounter against it (assuming you have few comrades)
At 4th level, you have a 70% chance to hit an Ogre, a monster you had little chance of beating earlier. And the Orc becomes more of a nuisance - groups of Orcs, wow that's different (at least ideally )

At 10th level, you fight a Dragon 8 times larger than you. The Orcs? Laughable? The Ogre? Maybe in groups...

That changes a lot in feeling. And that is what it is all about, because in the end, you still expect to somehow prevail (most the time), because you're not here to play "Krusk, the heroic Barbarian who was killed after a dozen battles against Orcs." You're more interested in "Krusk, the legendary Barbarian who slaughtered the Horde of Goblins that wanted to invade Littletown, slayed the Dragon Vallisus on top of the Huge Spire of Despair, and died valiantly in the battle of Slaugtherhouse, while destroying the Avatar of the Demon Prince of Snakes..."*)

*Except, off course, for the cheesy names

 

[Remathilis]

we use d10's to attack in 4e. Are u not in a playtest group????

Um, NDA much, JRR?

 

[AllisterH]

Sooo, wait a minute. Scientifically we have the most fun when we have to roll a 7 or higher to hit a monster or NPC. What? Where is this from?

Apparently, videogame makers did studies to see what the "sweet spot" is. Basically, the ease of success which people prefer.

If you make a game too easy, you don't get the sense of satisfaction upon completing it. In fact, you'll get bored with it and move on to something else even before finishing it.

If you make a game too hard, people get frustrated with the game and are liable again to put it down and again, move on to something else.

Now, the sweet spot, this is when the game isn't too easy yet not too difficult.