OK, I'm in ...

EATherrian said:
the news from the D&D Experience is making me think of cancelling my pre-orders. The power levels seem way too high; and we're talking 1st level here and it's way too high.

No insult intended here, but I genuinely don't understand whats wrong with this.

If you enjoy one edition of a game, with characters that have 50 hit points (or whatever), and fireballs that do 20 damage (or whatever)...

Why would you have a problem with the next edition, if the characters have 100 hit points (or whatever), and fireballs do 40 damage (or whatever)?

How could that possibly be such a deal breaker that you'd consider canceling pre-ordered books?

Keep in mind, theres no anger, or aggression in what I'm saying. I simply hear this logic repeatedly, and it never makes any sense to me. Its never "I have a problem that it seems like fireballs are going to do too much/not enough damage", its always "I have a problem with the game SCALING OUT OF CONTROL".

The numbers change as a function of the environment changing. Its like fractions... so long as you do the same to both the numerator, and the denominator... it still works out the same.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Mouseferatu said:
Sorry, that's a misunderstanding. There will be punching, and if you want pie, you need to take it from the orc in the next room...

Oh...umm...so I guess I misunderstood about the dancers then, too?
 

EATherrian said:
"I was actually starting to move towards the 4e camp, but the news from the D&D Experience is making me think of cancelling my pre-orders. The power levels seem way too high; and we're talking 1st level here and it's way too high. I'd hate to see higher level play. I need to know if it's possible to power it down. I know some might say I should play a different game, but I've been playing about the same power level since the Red Box; so if I can't still play me game then it's not my D&D anymore. I'm also concerned that the game is built around the miniatures line rather than visa versa."

Honestly, I don't completely disagree. The power level seems higher (but then it seemed higher too when I saw 3E for the first time ... "OMG, +4 to attack and damage at 1st level!!! Broken!!!"). Hit points and some of the other numbers are certainly higher. But then we know some of the things that scale ridiculously in 3E are out, like iterative attacks. And if it's still only one action per round, then a character may have a lot of powers but you're still only using one at a a time, and more options is certainly good. I do remember how much it sucked as a BD&D wizard once my one spell was cast, lurking at the back hoping to stab somthing with my dagger without getting spitted by an orc.

I don't think my unease with the 1st level power will settle until I see leveling in action and we can see if the advertisements about "expanding the sweet spot" are true.
 


hossrex said:
No insult intended here, but I genuinely don't understand whats wrong with this.

If you enjoy one edition of a game, with characters that have 50 hit points (or whatever), and fireballs that do 20 damage (or whatever)...

Why would you have a problem with the next edition, if the characters have 100 hit points (or whatever), and fireballs do 40 damage (or whatever)?

How could that possibly be such a deal breaker that you'd consider canceling pre-ordered books?

Keep in mind, theres no anger, or aggression in what I'm saying. I simply hear this logic repeatedly, and it never makes any sense to me. Its never "I have a problem that it seems like fireballs are going to do too much/not enough damage", its always "I have a problem with the game SCALING OUT OF CONTROL".

The numbers change as a function of the environment changing. Its like fractions... so long as you do the same to both the numerator, and the denominator... it still works out the same.

Well, that's why I want to hear more. Mind you I had to do some work in most of the editions to get the play I want. It just looks to me (from my limited knowledge of course) that instead of house-ruling 4th Edition, I would have to eviscerate it to get the desired effect. I'm holding off on the cancellation, but I really need to hear more.
 

EATherrian said:
Well, that's why I want to hear more. Mind you I had to do some work in most of the editions to get the play I want. It just looks to me (from my limited knowledge of course) that instead of house-ruling 4th Edition, I would have to eviscerate it to get the desired effect. I'm holding off on the cancellation, but I really need to hear more.

How is that a function of power escalation, and what purpose would house ruling down power escalation serve?
 


I'll give it a fair trial (I'd do it even if I weren't working on the field), but I have one concern that maybe Mouseferatu can shed a light on:

Up until 3e, each class felt very different from each other. Not only were the actions they took different (skulk about, throw fireballs, turn undead, bash heads, etc), but the management of each, the mechanical side, was very different. Some classes had daily resources, others had to worry about their hp, others were all about the skills, etc.

Now, with 4e, every class has mechanically the same management. At 1st level you have two at-wills, an encounter and a daily, wether you're a rogue, fighter or wizard. File off the names and you could swap classes and power sources about.

Could this lead to a saturation level, where it seems that no matter what class you're playing, you're going through the same motions? Like playing only swordsages, just with different stances?

Just a thought that occurred me.
 



Remove ads

Top