D+D Power Creep

[I'm A Banana]

Personally, I want to see a PHBI redo with what they have learned from the last couple of years.

What about HotFK/FL? Chop suey?

 

[Mad Hamish]

I've been playing various incarnations of D+D since 1980, and have recently gotten into the 4e game (thanks, Critical Hit podcast!)

I have the PHB, DMG, and MM. I have flipped through most of the classes in the PHB, and was looking at the PHB3 last week. It looks to me like the charater classes in PHB3 are inherently more powerful than those in the PHB. The monk, for instance, gets movement AND attacks for all his/her at-will powers. Noone in the PHB gets such benefits.

All PHB1 classes are playable.
Rangers still put out the most damage and Fighters still have a claim to be the best defender in the game and can get striker level damage.

The monk has mobility over most other classes but has weak points as well and the rogue has (iirc) some pretty nifty at will utility powers.

PHB3 classes also suffer from less support being out there than earlier classes, the seeker being particularly badly off for this.

Then I was reading the thread on broken powers here on EN World, and saw people talking about how the monster damage is increasing to keep up with the power of the characters.

My question is: is it even worth trying to play a character created from the PHB?

if that's the character you want to play you'll mostly be o.k.
It also depends a bit on what you're meaning.

All the PHB1 classes have gotten a fair few additional powers/feats etc available through later publications.
So a fighter with access to PHB1, PHB2, PHB3, Martial Powers 1 & 2 has a lot more options than 1 built entirely from PHB1, but a fighter just on PHB1 would probably still be playable.

I know with previous editions of the game, playing a straight fighter for example became a useless proposition because other classes had been created who could blow the fighter out of the water. My frustration with this power creep led me to stop buying D+D materials. At this point, I play a 3.5 campaign which is deliberately limited to the original three core books in order to keep that power creep at bay.

Before I invest too much into 4e, am I going to hit the same problems here?

Thanks for your help!

I don't think the point has been hit as yet.
Several of the original classes have been strengthened pretty heavily by newer options (Wizard, Paladin and Warlord are much better off now with splatbooks than when they were originally released)

 

[Destil]

PHB3 has only one real thing that's creep: psionic classes that can spam weakly augmented psionic attacks at high level all encounter (some of the level 1s that add ability scores to d20 roles for 1 PP are insane at level 16 or so when you've got double digit power points and a +7). And possibly some sick things you can do with hybrids.

The monk is heavily limited by action economy, and their striker feature works best when they're adjacent to more than one bad guy. They need that mobility to keep up.

The real power creep: Item Bonuses to damage and healing (actually, the problem with healing is all the items with untyped bonuses). Crazy surgeless healing powers (not that the PHB doesn't have Sacred Ground, still one of the biggest winners right there). Paragon and Epic tier feats that double leader healing by giving it to two targets. Being able to stack a dozen bonuses onto a basic attack (because they were all designed with the intent that basic attacks were week).

PHB1 has the Fighter, Pit Fighter, Daggersmaster, Divine Oracle, Archery Ranger, Hospilitar, Pole-arm Momentum, Lasting Frost & Wintertouched etc etc. Easily some of the most powerful stuff in the game, and the classes especially because of all the support are very very potent.

The power creep is pretty significant (I'm particularity miffed at 'double leader healing at paragon/epic and then double monster damage. 3 round combats were one the things 4E fixed), but it doesn't really render the game unplayable. Just means the DM has to be on their toes and know their stuff.

 

[Dice4Hire]

What about HotFK/FL? Chop suey?

For their usefulness to my 4E game, they might as well be.

 

[jbear]

I think I'm going to agree with Renau on this question:

PHB1 only Fighter, Ranger, Rogue, Cleric, Warlord: Right on line
Paladin and Warlock: Caught up after additional material was released.

You could stick to PHB1 only without too much of an issue I think. But by including all the options your game won't teeter and collapse by any means. There is no current class in the game that I can think of that makes me go: 'whoah, I have to play that! It's way better than anything else!'

WotC has been pretty thourough working on the broken bits.

Monster damage was a needed improvement to the game to challenge the PCs prpoerly, make combat more thrilling, deadly and exciting.

I see the expansion of the game as a beautiful thing. The options available have increased palyer options but without over bloating pc power levels. I do think 4e is a different animal from the day of its first release. An animal I prefer.

 

[Psikus]

My question is: is it even worth trying to play a character created from the PHB?

Mostly, yes. The issue isn't really power creep - as has been explained above, PHB has some of the strongest classes/builds in the game and a bunch of awesome feats. Its paragon paths in particular tend to be miles above those in other books. However, you should be aware that there are also a few trap builds that can be frustratingly weak and limited for a new player - star pact warlocks come to mind and, to a lesser degree, strength clerics. If you are not using any supplements, paladins can be a bit underwhelming, and a wizard's performance varies a LOT depending on your power selection.

That is regarding power level. If we are looking at overall quality of the options, I think other books have better class designs than the ones in PHB. My personal favourite is PHB2, and the Essentials ones (Heroes of the Fallen Lands and Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms) come pretty close.

 

[Sasahara]

Thank you all for the replies! I will admit, I was starting to despair, having finally found some interest in 4e. But reading these responses gives me the hope to continue looking for a game to play in (PbP or IRL).

Who knows, maybe one day I'll know enough about 4e to intelligently join these discussions!

 

[Dice4Hire]

intelligently join these discussions!

Believe me, intelligence is not a requirement, nor is experience. This is the Internet.

 

[Runestar]

There is however, a fair amount of errata for the core books, which can be overwhelming if you try to digest them all at one go. What do you all think, should he incorporate them?

 

[Aegeri]

There is however, a fair amount of errata for the core books, which can be overwhelming if you try to digest them all at one go. What do you all think, should he incorporate them?

Yeah, the vast majority of it are clarifications and won't really bother 99% of players. Most of the things that were fixed needed to due to really strange combinations and interactions with other classes. One thing that probably bucks this trend is the bloodmage, which was simply horribly confusing on how it worked rules wise and was grossly overpowered.