Does 4e have a sweet spot?

[athos]

I think 4.0's sweet spot is -0.5

I tried 4.0, but decided to stick to 3.5 because I couldn't find any of it that was "sweet". Not trying to start a battle of versions, but I really do like mid to high level 3.5, it seems like once you get a character to those levels, it is very fun. Maybe that is because you are very powerful compared to the world around you, maybe that is because it has the feel that you finally made it to "heroic" levels and now you can do greater deeds than mere mortals. It gives you a goal to shoot for.

4.0 did a good job of making all the levels roughly equal in enjoyment, if you like 4.0 I suppose, which was one of their design goals according to what they said at Gencon, but I really liked having to work a character "up to the good levels". When I played 4.0, I couldn't really tell the difference in my character at level 1 or level 5, which for me, was a disappointment. I want to see a progression.

Anyways, taking away the "sweet spot" was what they were shooting for, and I think 4.0 accomplished that very well. But I find that I liked the sweet spot.

 

[Abraxas]

Paragon seems to be the sweet spot for me. Heroic is fun, but paragon is better. At upper paragon you start to get to many conditions every single round and every time a critter connects - epic it just gets worse because they no longer have to hit (too many auras) and stuff starts to have after effects and I can't shore up my weak defenses enough to not be hit (when the DM says he hit a will defense 18 higher than what I have and its not a crit I know I'm in trouble)

 

[Goonalan]

As a DM (and not a player) I like those early levels (maybe 1-4), and as a stat freak (see sig) I keep all manner of odd notes- my present gaggle of players have accompanied me through (I think) 16 scenarios since the start of the year (with them playing out a number of campaign arcs)- so the same players are running agroup through Wizards Core adventures (approx. 60% through P1 atm) with a different set of PCs through the Scales of War AP (just finished the 4th scenario) and through some other pathways cobbled together using Goodman Games scenarios and the like.

I've found it slightly harder to judge how encounters are going to play out as the PCs level- obviously using bought material that's not a big problem however it troubles me when what I thought would be an easy fight turns into a tangle, while the climax (my PCs just killed Skalmad, King of the Trolls and a couple of Warren Trolls and Nothics- their first encounter with Skalmad, in two rounds). Most often it's the case that the dice go against me (at least that's the story I'm sticking too). I've had encounters where a player has made three Crit rolls with an area Burst Spell and basically decimated the bad guys in the first round.

I spent a session the other day rolling nothing above a five- honestly, it was riduculous.

At the lower levels I feel I'm always in with a chance (of killing a few of them- that's not my intention overall but those tense moments- particularly at the climax of the adventures are very memorable).

Maybe my players are much brighter than me, don't get me wrong there's not a bad level of play in 4e (not that I've found- good friends and a great game always make for an entertaining evening) but the lower levels are often more dangerous for my players.

Higher levels brings drama and intrigue, with the twisted campaign arc playing out.

Lower levels mayhem, limited choices, and carnage, significantly I've killed maybe ten PCs playing through the 16 scenarios-

Lvl 10 x1
Lvl 4 x1
Lvl 1 x8

Lower levels are in comparison imho blood-soaked, and oft times thrilling.

The OP stated that they couldn't find any low level monsters, I keep a table of every creature the PCs have killed (in all adventures) to date, hang on... just go and find it.

Not including Minions there are-

21 x different Level 1 Monsters,
26 x different Level 2 Monsters,
36 x different Level 3 Monsters &
28 x different Level 4 Monsters.

More than enough, and at Lower Levels I find the Elites and Solos are worth their weight in gold (for me- my players may think differently, ask them about their first Gelatinous Cube, or their first Insubstantial enemy, or Irontooth)- at lower levels monsters can really stick around and prove troublesome.

That said the highest Level I've DM'ed is 12th so maybe I'm in for a surprise down the line- nothing bad to report so far though.

 

[malraux]

IMO, level 2 and up. I dislike how level 1 has just one encounter and one daily. Getting a few options up is better. That said, I haven't played about 19th yet, or DMed above 18th. I've seen some stuff that might be problematic. The monster damage to PC damage seems a bit off. I also saw the same thing at the end of heroic tier though, so I'm hoping that at level 21, things get tougher again.

 

[S'mon]

IME GMing and playing 4e the sweet spot seems to start around 4th, maybe 3rd, exactly the same as in 3e and 1e-2e. But I haven't GM'd or played high enough levels to know whether/when it caps out. If it follows the 1e-3e precedents that'd be around 8th-10th; but 4e was supposedly designed to avoid that, but then so was 3e.

 

[Stalker0]

I would go with levels 8-14 myself, somewhere in there.

I too found low levels too limited, my party would get bored with only a few powers. Only did they get to the levels that they could go an encounter and not use all of their powers did they start really getting into it.

Paragon Paths also helps to shape the flavor of a character well.

Lastly, I found wizards (and I would guess other controllers as well) very weak at low levels. They didn't have a lot of control. This jumped up dramatically into the paragon levels.

 

[Dungeoneer]

Don't knock level 1 & 2 too hard. While I agree that they can feel limiting, I've found that they're pretty necessary for getting the hang of how your character works unless you've got a very experienced party. If that's the case, just jump to 3 or 4.

 

[TarionzCousin]

Since most of the responses are "yes," this must be Andy Collins' least favorite ENWorld thread ever.

 

[Starfox]

Having played from 1-28, I feel 2-5 and 12-16 to be the best levels. Epic levels are unending cheese and later heroic and paragon levels feel grindy. At the beginning of Paragon tier, everything works pretty well, as well as the midpoint of heroic.

 

[wedgeski]

I haven't played in an Epic campaign yet but certainly 1-18 haven't shown any particular bumps in the road. I'd quite happily say the designers met their goal of expanding the sweet spot to the entire game, even if the switch to Paragon was probably the most fun part of the story for me personally.