D&D 4E Mike Mearls on how D&D 4E could have looked

OK on this "I would’ve much preferred the ability to adopt any role within the core 4 by giving players a big choice at level 1, an option that placed an overlay on every power you used or that gave you a new way to use them."
Basically have Source Specific Powers and less class powers. But I think combining that with having BIG differing stances to dynamically switch role might be a better idea so that your hero can adjust role to circumstance. I have to defend this NPC right now vs I have to take down the big bad right now vs I have to do minion cleaning right now, I am inspiring allies in my interesting way, who need it right now.

and the obligatory
Argghhhh on this. " I wanted classes to have different power acquisition schedules"

And thematic differences seemed to have been carried fine.

 

[Parmandur]

Couldn't a 1st level PC roll with +2 for proficiency, +4 for Guidance, +4 for 18 stat? Which would be a 1 in 80 chance to hit DC 30.

My question is fairly simple - what is there (given bounded accuracy) that is feasible for a 15th level fighter but impossible for a 1st level fighter.

DC 25 or 30 doesn't fit that description: a 15th level fighter has +4 or +5 to CON, and even with +2 from Remarkable Athlete has almost no chance of succeeding at that attempt. (Literally no chance against DC 30 without further buffing, and even then the chance is very small.)

As I posted upthread, DC Heroes tries to deal with this issue via unbounded accuracy, that is, allowing very significant variation in both numbers on the PC sheet, and system-supported DCs.

4e tackles it completely differently, by looking first to the fiction to establish feasibility, and then having a chart to read off the DC given the level. MHRP and HeroQuest revised are both fundamentally the same in this respect. (Although obviously different in the technical devices they use to achieve this result.)

The difference I think in the approaches, and maybe where @pemerton ' s contention is, is that 4e tells you these things are part of the epic tier and they involve this specific fiction... while 5e says these are beyond the ken of certain men and you the DM decide what that is in your particular campaign. I think pemerton wants the game to define these things for him while I (and I think others) rea happy to decide what these things are for ourselves in any particular camapign.

The fact that official adventures seem to rarely if ever use these DC's (thus also not attaching a specific fiction to them) would seem to reinforce this notion of the DM defining what falls into those extreme DC's.

EDIT: I want a more mythical campaign... Fighters sticking their hands into forges of creation to hold an artifact while it is created become doable at high levels. More sword and sorcery... perhaps gigantic leaps and feats of extreme strength beyond those of most men become feasible at the higher end of the DC's.This is a red herring. I've already posted upthread that it's easy to change the fiction of 4e while preserving the mechanical framework, and WotC published two examples: the Neverwinter Campaign Setting compresses the fiction of Heroic and Paragon into the mechanical framework of Heroic (mostly by offering versions of beholders, mind flayers and the like statted at heroic tier); while Dark Sun extends the fiction of Heroic and Paragon tier over the three tiers of paly (by statting up the sorcerer kings, who in default 4e terms would be Paragon tier opponents, as epic).

The best description ever offered on these boards of the relationship between bonuses and fiction in 4e is the following:

​

The contrast I am drawing between 4e and 5e is fairly straightforward: in 4e the feasibility of an action can be settled upon independently of mechanical minutiae - by reference to the ideas expressed in the tiers of play, to the prior established colour, to the flavour of the paragon paths at use in the game, etc. Once that has been done, the system has a simple way for setting a DC which will mechanically satisfy the desiderata for feasibility, namely, the DC-by-level-chart; and also a framework for integrating individual checks into the resolution of a scene, namely, skill challenges.

5e doesn't have a skill challenge system, and at least as bounded accuracy is presented appears to set a DC that is prior to the question of feasibility, and settles the question of feasibility rather than being an afterthought to the question of feasibility.

Some posts in this thread seem to say the opposite, and that in fact DCs can be set just as they are in 4e. But then (i) what is the point of keeping on reiterating bounded accuracy? And (ii) what is the objection to a DC-by-level chart to facilitate this?

My main objection to a DC-by-level chart would be that it is harder to memorize than 5 numbers catagories as, universally "Easy-Moderate-Hard-Very Hard-Impossible." For 5E, no reference is necessary it's all in the head. Certainly DCs can, and I'm sure often are, set like in 4E, but level based charts are unnecessary.

I'd go so far as to say that I see a strong link between 4E's system and 5E iterating on it.

 

[Parmandur]

OK, so if the only "gating" is via setting high DCs, then we have the fact that a 15th level fighter succeeds against a DC 27 on a roll of 20 (+5 for stat, +2 for remarkable athlete). Suppose that the GM allows Athletics to apply (although to me the relevant stat seems to be CON rather than STR) then the roll required is 17+. I don't characterise that as "feasible". As opposed to very likely to fail.

Well, it moves from impossible to possible, which is a big leap, and what the low level guy is likely to fail at is easy for the high level guy.

Guidance would be magic, obviously.

 

[MwaO]

Some posts in this thread seem to say the opposite, and that in fact DCs can be set just as they are in 4e. But then (i) what is the point of keeping on reiterating bounded accuracy? And (ii) what is the objection to a DC-by-level chart to facilitate this?

Bounded Accuracy isn't mentioned in the 5e books. Which is weird that a game concept so integral to an RPG doesn't at any point get brought up given how easy it would have been to do that.

Also, it isn't complicated — 5e is very much so about trying to target a 2/3rds chance of succeeding at a task — most 1st level PCs have a +5 to hit and the average AC for CR 1 = 13 per DMG. So roll an 8+ and therefore 65% chance of success. There just isn't certainty of every single check being 65%.

So here's an example of how a chart could look for 5e. Assume you need to make 20 checks. You should succeed 13 times on average assuming someone is trained in a particular skill, started with a 16 in their primary stat, and then raised that stat at every opportunity until it hits 20. Which means at levels 4, 5, 8, 9, 13, and 17, there's a slight raise in difficulty. As it turns out, we can divide by 4 on each side to just check for 5 times.

1-3 = 2 DC 10, 3 DC 15
4 = 1 DC 10, 4 DC 15
5-7 = 5 DC 15(can trade 2 DC 15 checks for 1 DC 10+1 DC 20 check)
8 = 4 DC 15, 1 DC 20
9-12 = 3 DC 15, 2 DC 20
13-16 = 2 DC 15, 3 DC 20
17-20 = 1 DC 15, 4 DC 20(can trade 2 DC 20 checks for 1 DC 15+1 DC 25 checks, though be careful — DC 25 tends to fail unless a Rogue auto-succeeds at them)

There's the chart for writing up adventures in 5e and the consequences of only going up +6 instead of +12.

 

[Hussar]

Because handwave handwave... it's his game world the dm can set trivial difficulties for high level martial types to do awesome stuff or just let them do it by asking see see see. If he wants to and will magically balance the classes with the awesome advice in the DMG he needs no other tools but that and the reason it's not implemented except as vaguery is to allow the DM to decide without pesky players getting in the way with their systematized well defined ability to accomplish badass things and because chin ups are hard ... and these new DMs will do it exactly the way they have never done AND completely get it right because balance should allow the DM to always say NO except if the player is a caster cause you can never say no to a caster unless you make sure they buy into a game where they arent superior well in advance. Because DMs can always override the rules and remove spell castings superiority they so can just see there is a paragraph in the DMG saying they can so make them completely inferior. /sarcasm /sarcasm /sarcasm....

I feel a great disturbance in the snark.

 

[pemerton]

My main objection to a DC-by-level chart would be that it is harder to memorize than 5 numbers catagories as, universally "Easy-Moderate-Hard-Very Hard-Impossible." For 5E, no reference is necessary it's all in the head. Certainly DCs can, and I'm sure often are, set like in 4E, but level based charts are unnecessary.

I don't know if anyone has memorised the DC-by-level chart. I haven't.

My concern isn't look-up time required to adjudicate. It's about having a system that, once I've decided that something should be feasible, allows me to set a DC that will deliver on that prior understanding of the fiction. Knowing that there are 5 DCs doesn't help with that. I mean, if I wanted to I could adjudicate Heroic and Paragon 4e using the same DCs plus one more (the Hard DC for 20th level is 34). But that wouldn't help me with what I actually want, which is a benchmark for mechanical feasibility once the question about the fiction has been ansswered.

It's not as if the concept is foreign to 5e - it has a CR system for combat feasibility, which is highly sensitive to the non-bounded aspects of 5e resolution, namely, hp and damage per round. But 5e doesn't extend it to non-combat. Which goes back to the reason this discussion started: the absence of such a framework for non-combat tends to push against what is possible for martial PCs. And to reiterate the illustrative example - I take it that it is obvious to everyone that a 1st level fighter can't do the forge thing, which means the DC must be 25+, which means that even a 15th level fighter has little chance either.

EDIT:

Well, it moves from impossible to possible, which is a big leap, and what the low level guy is likely to fail at is easy for the high level guy.

Which is my point. Possible is not the same as feasible. And if easy at high level entials possible at low level, and we take it for granted that a 1st level fighter is in some sense mundane/not supernatural, then it follows that no supernatural tasks are easy for the high level fighter. No Achilles, no Hercules, not even much Conan.

 

[Hussar]

I am not unsympathetic to your complaint. It would be good to have good clear rules that gave every DM (and Player) the same idea of what was possible and on the other hand it just does not seem possible to get everyone to agree.

In the Conan story 'The Tower of the Elephant' he does not rely on a spell to get into the Tower he uses a grappling hook and rope to climb up. Imagining that was a party of DnD characters, you could have the Magic-User fly the rope to the top of the Tower (using one of her spells to do so) or you could have the Fighter throw the rope up achieving the same result with no loss of resources.

Now I understand that resource management is not a popular style but I am still not sure why you would argue for the Fighter to have to memorise the Rope Throwing spell as an advantage over the more usual ability check to throw a rope, even if the ability check has a chance of failure.

Which is fine to a point. Unfortunately, the whole resource management issue goes out the window at higher levels which is, I thought, what we were talking about. See, the 1st level fighter and the 15th level fighter don't have too different chances of success of throwing that rope. 20%, 30% difference by and large? Meanwhile, that 15th level wizard has so many spell slots that burning a low level one, or, simply using some ritual is such a trivial expenditure that it isn't really a resource management issue at all.

Let's be honest here, how often is a 15th level caster going to blow his or her full load out of spells in a single day? That's one hell of a lot of destruction. And, heck, you keep insisting on levitate. Why? I can mage hand the rope 30 feet and hook the grapple, silently and successfully every single time. Doesn't even cost me a resource.

What I would like to see is high level fighters be able to have a sort of free form power which lets them do amazing physical feats as a limited resource. If we're going to allow low level casters to bypass the DM to surmount challenges, why not let the fighter types do it too?

 

[Garthanos]

I feel a great disturbance in the snark.

[MENTION=996]Tony Vargas[/MENTION] isn't around so much.

 

[Garthanos]

Wonder what resource fighting types have that limits their workday.... and which might be lost if they were able to over exert by force of will.

 

[Parmandur]

I don't know if anyone has memorised the DC-by-level chart. I haven't.

My concern isn't look-up time required to adjudicate. It's about having a system that, once I've decided that something should be feasible, allows me to set a DC that will deliver on that prior understanding of the fiction. Knowing that there are 5 DCs doesn't help with that. I mean, if I wanted to I could adjudicate Heroic and Paragon 4e using the same DCs plus one more (the Hard DC for 20th level is 34). But that wouldn't help me with what I actually want, which is a benchmark for mechanical feasibility once the question about the fiction has been ansswered.

It's not as if the concept is foreign to 5e - it has a CR system for combat feasibility, which is highly sensitive to the non-bounded aspects of 5e resolution, namely, hp and damage per round. But 5e doesn't extend it to non-combat. Which goes back to the reason this discussion started: the absence of such a framework for non-combat tends to push against what is possible for martial PCs. And to reiterate the illustrative example - I take it that it is obvious to everyone that a 1st level fighter can't do the forge thing, which means the DC must be 25+, which means that even a 15th level fighter has little chance either.

EDIT:
Which is my point. Possible is not the same as feasible. And if easy at high level entials possible at low level, and we take it for granted that a 1st level fighter is in some sense mundane/not supernatural, then it follows that no supernatural tasks are easy for the high level fighter. No Achilles, no Hercules, not even much Conan.

Making 8 weapon attacks in 6 seconds on a pretty consistent basis is as preternatural as anything I can think of from those figures (yes, the Fighters mythic-level abilities are about fighting). To include the Rogue, a high Level Rogue can auto-suceed any DC in their wheelhouse under 27, and DC's don't go past 30 so they only have a 15% failure rate on the impossible.

The DMG does detail how doing things, such as the forge example, or wire-fu Wuxia, can be achieved by the DM putting the desired actions for the genre of the campaign on the scale of difficulty. AssignDC, roll, narrative moves forward.

 

[Shasarak]

Which is fine to a point. Unfortunately, the whole resource management issue goes out the window at higher levels which is, I thought, what we were talking about. See, the 1st level fighter and the 15th level fighter don't have too different chances of success of throwing that rope. 20%, 30% difference by and large? Meanwhile, that 15th level wizard has so many spell slots that burning a low level one, or, simply using some ritual is such a trivial expenditure that it isn't really a resource management issue at all.

Let's be honest here, how often is a 15th level caster going to blow his or her full load out of spells in a single day? That's one hell of a lot of destruction. And, heck, you keep insisting on levitate. Why? I can mage hand the rope 30 feet and hook the grapple, silently and successfully every single time. Doesn't even cost me a resource.

If you want to talk about high level play, then by 15th level my Fighter has all sorts of items that bypass all those normal restrictions you complain about. like Boots of Flying, Cloak of the Bat or Potion of Gaseous Form for example. Even if I had to rely on the Magic-User now she is casting Mass Fly instead of Fly, Teleport for the whole party or any of the other super party buffs that there are to choose from.

By 15th level the party is not walking from town to town, they should be all using Griffins, Dragons or Flying Castles. In an epic level DnD game why is the Fighter the only one using the same bent sword and second hand leather armour that he started with at level 1?

What I would like to see is high level fighters be able to have a sort of free form power which lets them do amazing physical feats as a limited resource. If we're going to allow low level casters to bypass the DM to surmount challenges, why not let the fighter types do it too?

They do have a free form power, usually it is their Strength. Sometimes it is their Dex or Con if their crafting magical items. A high level Fighter should have an advantage when roleplaying in a social situation where anyone knows about their reputation. Heck why dont you check your equipment list, maybe you have a way to bypass the DM written down there.