Advancement even faster?

[Li Shenron]

They’re going for levelling every 2 to 3 sessions.

They might be going for 1 level up per session, to get rid of "dead sessions".

 

[Herremann the Wise]

From the news on the frontpage:
This irritates me. I thought that playing was the primary reward for sitting down at the table for 4 to 8 hours.

I find myself nodding my head here in agreeance.
Perhaps to put a similar sentiment in different words:
"For me, the game is more about what the PCs have DONE rather than what they CAN do."

Unfortunately, if the game focuses more so on on the ever accruing number of abilities, items and leveling bonuses, the harder it makes my job as DM to focus on what differentiates a pencil and paper game from "World of Warcraft".

Funnily enough, I think 4E will end up being loads of fun to play for the players, it just won't be the style of campaign game that I enjoy running. It will have been turned into an almost completely different animal.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[BryonD]

And, wasn't it pretty early on they said they weren't just stretching the old 1-20 game into 1-30, but putting Epic into core?

That was my understanding as recently as my earlier post in this thread.

But just in the last 24 hours there are new statements equating 20th to 20th from 3rd to 4th.
So that, if accurate, would mean that it is really faster advancement.

:\

They really need to get their brains around what they want to tell us as shut up about the rest.

I'm fine with learning everything tomorrow and I'm perfectly fine with not hearing another word for three months or more. But this dribs and drabs of half-statements is just resulting in people getting their hearts set on something they have no real reason to expect and people fixating on the worst case scenario extrapolations. They seem to be creating tension at least as much as excitement.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

That was my understanding as recently as my earlier post in this thread.

But just in the last 24 hours there are new statements equating 20th to 20th from 3rd to 4th.
So that, if accurate, would mean that it is really faster advancement.

I've not seen anything that directly said that Epic would become core. I've seen them classify the style of gaming calling levels 20-30 epic gaming, but I did not get the impression they meant that to mean the 3.5 Epic rules would be the base for those levels.

They really need to get their brains around what they want to tell us as shut up about the rest.

I'm fine with learning everything tomorrow and I'm perfectly fine with not hearing another word for three months or more. But this dribs and drabs of half-statements is just resulting in people getting their hearts set on something they have no real reason to expect and people fixating on the worst case scenario extrapolations. They seem to be creating tension at least as much as excitement.

I also would rather they their act together, decide what they mean to say and stop being so vague that they create rampant speculation that slowly turns into misinformation. Unfortunately I don't think that is going to happen. I think they care less about whether people are excited or angered. As long as they manage to keep people talking about it, they have accomplished the goal of creating buzz.

 

[green slime]

I'm curious to see how the solve the problem of the inexperienced player.

IMX, there are players who try their hand at a spellcaster PC, and fall over under the burden of trying to remember which spells did what, as they level up far faster than they can assimilate the new knowledge/skills/feats pertaining to their character.

Levelling up faster, with new options per level is something they just do not need.

 

[Wombat]

Wow.

Faster advancement.

Colour me "bored".

I prefer a good tale well-told, rather than constantly altering numbers on my character sheet.

 

[mhensley]

Fortunately the rate of advancement is probably one of the easiest things that a dm can change.

The main problem with slower advancement really only happens when you are trying to run a module that is for a range of levels and is designed for pc's advancing at the book rate. Then you either have to pad the module with more encounters or the pc's will slowly become outgunned at some point.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Wow.

Faster advancement.

Colour me "bored".

I prefer a good tale well-told, rather than constantly altering numbers on my character sheet.

Well, it is possible to have both, I think. Though it probably requires a good DM. The game rule will certainly not tell the tales...

 

[Nahat Anoj]

So, they are going for even faster level advancement? I assume this is because levelling is considered the primary reward for sitting down at the table for 4 to 8 hours. This irritates me. I thought that playing was the primary reward for sitting down at the table for 4 to 8 hours.

For me, the actual act of playing isn't the sole primary award. Indeed, the act of sitting around a table for 4 to 8 hours with the same group of people is very boring for me. Well, 4 hours I can handle, I guess. But that's pushing it . Seeing the story unfold and getting a vicarious thrill as the character grows and develops is the main draw for me.

And it's possible that 4e will speed up actual play - for example, fights will go quicker. If that's the case, you may be able to fill a 4 hour session with more encounters in 4e than with 3e. If that's the case, the characters are levelling up because they face more challenges per session. So the number of encounters required to level may be the same as or more than 3e, but, because the game plays more quickly, more stuff gets done.

 

[Reynard]

Seeing the story unfold and getting a vicarious thrill as the character grows and develops is the main draw for me.

Often described as "playing".

And it's possible that 4e will speed up actual play - for example, fights will go quicker. If that's the case, you may be able to fill a 4 hour session with more encounters in 4e than with 3e. If that's the case, the characters are levelling up because they face more challenges per session. So the number of encounters required to level may be the same as or more than 3e, but, because the game plays more quickly, more stuff gets done.

I am all for faster combat encounters. it leaves mopre session time for roleplaying, exploration and puzzles solving. The problem is, of course, that from what we have seen so far, the game is being geared expecially toiward combat -- even more so than 3.x. Not only is balance being considered (apparently) only in regards to combat, dungeons are being converted into multi-flow arenas and "unfun" activities are being excised.

The thing is that playing, and -- for me, particularly -- running D&D is fun. But I don't mean, when I say "running", "refereeing battlesbetween PCs and monsters/NPCs". I mean running the game -- presenting scenarios, challenges, puzzles and circumstances that make the players egaged and have fun. It seems that with 4E the definition of D&D is continuing to evolve -- as all things are wont to do, I suppose -- and therefore hte definition of "fun" is evolving. I am just not sure I will consider the new definition equivalent to the old, and I therefore I feel me and my "ilk" are on Darwin's chopping block.