Does 4e limit the scope of campaigns?

[Fallen Seraph]

Now for the prize, tell me... what type of ledge, to balance on, do you put in a paragon tier locale? Because it's DC isn't connected in any way to tiers... this is where I find the problem with the clarity of skills in 4e.

You mean the actual physical in-game ledge? Well there is numerous ways, probably hundreds of different ways this ledge could be like. It is whatever fits the current setting, mood, etc. You want a feeling of it being a treacherous one have it be slick with slime, or it be raining, etc. The DC is just a decider of its mechanical difficulty nothing more, it is up to the DM through the narrative and descriptions to translate this to the players.

 

[Primal]

The City of Brass and its inhabitants are epic because there needs to be a level-appropriate city for epic heroes to go to.

Stop thinking about it, you'll only hurt yourself. You parted ways with the 4e design philosophy when you said gaming doesn't need to be fun.

I don't think that's what GW said. "Fun" is a relative concept -- I may think RPGs and computer games are fun, but some of my friends don't. Likewise, I may think that a vivid, breathing, internally-consistent setting and playing in intrigue-laden, combat-light campaigns is more fun than, say, participating in a more combat-heavy campaign such as 'Scales of War'. You might have a different concept of "fun", but that's just as "legit" as mine.

 

[Burrito Al Pastor]

Now for the prize, tell me... what type of ledge, to balance on, do you put in a paragon tier locale? Because it's DC isn't connected in any way to tiers... this is where I find the problem with the clarity of skills in 4e.

Edit: Or what type of walls are found to climb in Paragon-tier or Epic-tier locations...here, I'll even help...

The Acrobatics skill's "Balance" section lists the DC for moving across a narrow (less than one foot wide) or unstable surface as DC 20. +5 if it's less than 6 inches, +5 if it's both narrow and unstable. DC 20 is a Moderate challenge for characters of level 16-18, so if our characters are in the second half of the tier, the appropriate type of ledge is one that is less than one foot but greater than six inches in width. If your party is on the lower half of the tier, make the ledge, say, 16 inches, and throw a -5 to the DC on it. Alternately, you could make it a flat 20 across the tier, and it would be Hard for characters in the beginning of the tier, but it would scale down to somewhere between Easy and Moderate by the end of the tier.

Similarly, brick walls or slippery cave walls might be good for Climb at paragon, and by epic... well, brass is pretty smooth, so a DC of 30 might not be out of the question.

 

[Imaro]

Well, none of the other environment tables than page 42 have anything to do with level, either. Doors, for instance, have fixed break DC's.

The sidebar on page 65 has the best explanation I can think of:
Emphasis mine. Page 42 is supposed to be a facilitator of off-the-cuff play, not a strait-jacket telling you that the same ledge gets harder just because you went up a level.

EDIT: Me? I'd say "just a ledge" is always DC 10. In order to justify a paragon-level DC, it must be more than a ledge. Lava and cattle-prod's could help.

But do you at least see my point here... why not just be consistent with how the DC's for skills are determined... why are some challenges abstracted out to tier levels (though not in any way related to the tier of the PC's) while others are based on description and difficulty levels that are independent of tier?

You mean the actual physical in-game ledge? Well there is numerous ways, probably hundreds of different ways this ledge could be like. It is whatever fits the current setting, mood, etc. You want a feeling of it being a treacherous one have it be slick with slime, or it be raining, etc. The DC is just a decider of its mechanical difficulty nothing more, it is up to the DM through the narrative and descriptions to translate this to the players.

Huh? So there are paragon-tier locks that show up in paragon-tier places... but no paragon-tier ledges to balance on... or paragon-tier walls to climb or... well you get what I'm saying now don't you? Why aren't DC's determined and measured in the same way for all skills?

 

[Burrito Al Pastor]

I don't think that's what GW said.

No, that's what he said:

I stand by my original statement - it is my take that the purpose of gaming is experience and immerse oneself in a fictional setting. I also happen to enjoy this, which makes the game fun.

Some would say that the purpose of playing football is "to have fun." I would argue that such a definition is incorrect; there is a goal in such a game, and it is not "to have fun." Those who enjoy such a pasttime generally have fun in pursuit of the goals of their chosen game, but the having of fun is not the direct goal, it is a by-product.

"Fun" is a relative concept -- I may think RPGs and computer games are fun, but some of my friends don't. Likewise, I may think that a vivid, breathing, internally-consistent setting and playing in intrigue-laden, combat-light campaigns is more fun than, say, participating in a more combat-heavy campaign such as 'Scales of War'. You might have a different concept of "fun", but that's just as "legit" as mine.

It is 100% true that different people have different ideas of what is fun. GnomeWorks thinks immersion is fun. I think tactics are fun. I don't disagree with anything you're saying here, and I requote, with emphasis:

Roleplaying games are entertainment; your goal as GM is to make your games as entertaining as possible for all participants.
...
There is only one way to roleplay: the way that achieves the best balance between the various desires of your particular group.

I don't think the different ways in which people have fun is an issue that people are at odds about. The question here is if the goal of a game is to have fun. GnomeWorks asserts that the goal of a game is immersion, and you readily admit that immersion will not equal fun for all people, but in admitting this you have not taken any position regarding the goal of gaming.

 

[Nightson]

But do you at least see my point here... why not just be consistent with how the DC's for skills are determined... why are some challenges abstracted out to tier levels (though not in any way related to the tier of the PC's) while others are based on description and difficulty levels that are independent of tier?

Because they can't list every single possible circumstance requiring a skill check? The DC table is letting you know the math behind level appropriate DCs. The specific examples are giving you examples, they are not an exhaustive list. The idea isn't, "As you go up in level wooden doors magically become harder" The DMG explicitly says this isn't what's supposed to happen, wooden doors are supposed to be consistent with other wooden doors. What happens as the players go up in level is that fewer and fewer doors are made out of wood.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

why are some challenges abstracted out to tier levels (though not in any way related to the tier of the PC's)

Imara could you first explain what you mean with this to me, if a DC chart includes tiers there is only one tier being talked about. That is the PC tier, so the PCs being Heroic, Paragon, and Epic. Whether or not whatever is being discussed in that chart has a DC appropriate for the tier of the PCs is up to the DM. Now one would assume that to give a appropriate challenge it be in the same tier.

 

[Imaro]

Because they can't list every single possible circumstance requiring a skill check? The DC table is letting you know the math behind level appropriate DCs. The specific examples are giving you examples, they are not an exhaustive list. The idea isn't, "As you go up in level wooden doors magically become harder" The DMG explicitly says this isn't what's supposed to happen, wooden doors are supposed to be consistent with other wooden doors. What happens as the players go up in level is that fewer and fewer doors are made out of wood.

And you missed the point... I'm talking about the DC's in the skill section of the PHB. The designers should have either determined DC's by tiers or determined them by objective comparison (like the Climb DC's) but mixing and matching them only causes confusion. IMO, if the DC's for Climb are determined by ... rough walls, slipery surface, etc. Why aren't the DC's to Open Locks determined by poor quality, expertly crafted, etc.

 

[Nightson]

Why aren't the DC's to Open Locks determined by poor quality, expertly crafted, etc.

They are, why do you think the paragon lock is harder to open then the heroic lock?

 

[Imaro]

Imara could you first explain what you mean with this to me, if a DC chart includes tiers there is only one tier being talked about. That is the PC tier, so the PCs being Heroic, Paragon, and Epic. Whether or not whatever is being discussed in that chart has a DC appropriate for the tier of the PCs is up to the DM. Now one would assume that to give a appropriate challenge it be in the same tier.

Ok what I mean is this...

Open Lock

Heroic Tier 20
Paragon Tier 30
Epic Tier 35

As opposed to...

Climb DC's...
Surface

Ladder 0
Rope 10
Uneven Surface (Cave Wall) 15
Rough Surface (Brick Wall) 20
Slippery Surface +5
Unusually Smooth Surface +5

It's a consistency issue. In one example the DC's are derived through an objective comparison of negative attributes that effect the difficulty... in the other it is abstracted into "tiers" which honestly mean what? All I'm saying is that there would have been less confusion if they had stuck with a single way of setting DC's... either as tiers or as the negative attributes that affect the skill.

They are, why do you think the paragon lock is harder to open then the heroic lock?

No, they're not. The reason for the increase in DC is not defined for this skill, like it is for Climb and that is my point. When you look at the climb skill it lists the negative attributes, as examples of what causes the DC to climb a wall to become harder... this isn't explained with OL...unless Paragon is a negative quality that causes locks to become harder to open.

You interpreted it a certain way to mean a certain thing... but as has been evidenced by other posters it wasn't made exactly clear and could be interpreted (the same way as the skill chart, and no the DMG doesn't explicitely say that these numbers are based on challenges of this level) in different ways.

As an example... couldn't a lock whose mechanism had rusted or become clogged, or even had a lockpick broken off inside of it have become harder to open? So then is this a paragon-tier lock just like the one of better quality... if so then the tiers don't necessarily represent the increasing quality of the lock.