Power-creep Inevitable, But is that Bad?

[zaxzilla]

My 6th level eladrin wizard/scout died, and to replace her I made a Warforged Swordmage /Wizard. I used rules options from the PHB, Dragon and the FRPG. I haven't played him yet but on paper mathematically but he seems to slightly outshine the party (and definitely my dead wizard). Best AC, diversity of attacks, yet not highest damage, but loads of area attacks, teleportation powers and awesome hit-points.

Now understand I'm not complaining but I think that powercreep is inevitable. As new material is released more options are available, and greater synergy and optimization becomes available in character design. The only way to stop powercreep is to not release any more products. I'd rather have more books, articles and options, and let the DM compensate encounters if greater character optimization makes it necessary.

In 3.5 I thought scouts we alright in the Complete Adventurer, but once the feats came out in the Complete Scoundrel they could be powerhouses. The point I'm making is that powercreep is not a fault of design or designers as much as symptom of greater character options.

 

[Scribble]

I think one of the interesting things about 4e design is that it seems to be designed with the acceptance that "yes, we will be selling source books."

By this I mean the system has somewhat of a modular open endedness, that allows new rules to be added on, and swaped out without too much of an effect on the underlying core.

There will probably still be power creep, but at the same time, I think there will be less "unintended" power creep.

In addition, since the "powers" of the various classes are also open ended, you can compensate for later power creep, by adding more stuff to the older classes. The systrem overall might start to creep, but at least everything will be relative...

 

[Nymrohd]

I think some power creep is actually needed. Martial classes got it way better than the rest in the PHB at least as far as feats are concerned, which gives them an edge.
Also it is impossible for the system to be perfectly balanced. As long as we don't have extremes like the 3.5 druid, or the ToB classes, I think we will be OK.

 

[Crothian]

I've never had an issue with power creep. But I also never felt that balance should be a RPG design goal either.

 

[Wormwood]

Encounter and Monster design are both so intuitive and modular that I feel confident that I can compensate for increased PC power levels.

 

[Runestar]

Well, considering that the AV is chock full of item which grant saving throw penalties that apparently stack with one another (and with orb), I wonder what sort of insanity we can expect to see in future splatbooks...

 

[CleverNickName]

I don't know if power creep is necessarily a "bad" thing; it depends on the way you like your games.

As Scribble said, 4E is a lot more open-ended than the earlier editions. This gives it a lot more potential for power creep, simply because we never know what next month will bring in way of splatbooks, game settings, adventures, and so forth.

I'm not hating...it's great to have options. But with options comes a wide margin for error...removing an unbalanced rule (or feat, or spell, or class) from the game is a lot like removing urine from a swimming pool. Those who are concerned about power creep should be very cautious about buying The Next New Book.

 

[Nymrohd]

Truth be told, power creep is only an issue if the DM is a wuss or the players prefer to win than be challenged. Or at least that is how I see it. For everyone else, you just use the banhammer.

 

[Jack Colby]

Power creep is only a problem if you buy new stuff. I don't, and have not noticed power creep. Good way to enjoy the game and save money too.

 

[Aus_Snow]

No, power creep is not inevitable, so long as intelligent - and ethical - design and development, solid playtesting, and good editing are the guiding forces.

Yes, it is A Bad Thing. IMO and IME.