D&D 4E Sweet spot of 4e

[pemerton]

I agree with what's being said in this thread: 4e doesn't have a "sweet spot" as such, but the different tiers have different feels and impose different sorts of demands on players and GM.

Neverwinter is worth looking at for someone who wants to stick to the mechanics of Heroic Tier.

And Sage of Ages does start to break the maths of skill checks.

 

[MwaO]

I think 4e doesn't have a sweet spot per say as long as table optimization stays in a reasonable band. If there's one player who hasn't a clue and another player is playing an optimized build - things can get messy, especially if it is sudden optimization at either 11 or 16 that breaks things.

 

[GreyLord]

Personally, I think sweet spots differ from group to group.

I didn't really like the Paragon tier and for me the game started getting bogged down between levels 9 to around 21.

I absolutely loved playing everything up to level 9.

And then, with the right DM throwing epic threats (and at times utilizing the tables to create new monsters and foes...an experienced DM is the best for this), Epic tier turns awesome. AT that point you have tons of options, and the various strategies you can combine to take down foes can be an absolute blast. I played several Dark Sun campaigns in Epic 4e, and I loved them all (normally you are dealing with threats in regards to Dragon Kings or worse). You can truly feel world shattering at epic...

However, Paragon, for some reason, just always felt blah. You have a ton of powers at that point, but it's sort of where you have too many to play a simpler game (like Heroic) but not enough to have the plethora of strategies available to you like Epic levels.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

What do you think is the Sweet Spot, where interesting builds are possible, but it feels more like Hobbit and not like Aegon the Conqueror?

I am thinking of level 7 - 8, where there are no lvl 10 utilities and lvl 9 dailies, which seem to be already too OP. I am opened to HR, such as beeing level X and adding extra feat and enc power or so.

If I had to pick a sweet spot as a player or DM, it'd be either 10th, 20th, or 30th level -- because PCs get all the 'toys' of their current tier. If I had to pick a level to game in for twice-annual game days with some old pals, it'd be 10th -- because they'd get all the heroic 'toys,' without getting a lot of stuff, a good bit of which we'd probably forget about in the six months between game days. Plus, it's a lot closer to the Hobbit than the Wheel of Time, as you say.

IMO 4e combat works better with multiple foes because of action economy. Early solos didn't do enough damage and could be stunlocked too easily. Early monsters in general didn't do enough damage and might have too many hit points, or inflated defense values.

Post MM3 solo design improved with instinctive actions to provide extra attacks and other ways of preventing trivial stunlocking. Monster damage was upped and defenses and hit points lowered. Even so, there should typically be more than one opponent even in a solo fight.

Interactive terrain is the other feature in encounters, and the one I struggle with the most. Interactive terrain should often be usable by both sides once the PCs find out about it, probably the hard way. Big monsters like dragons may smash their way through some terrain like ice walls to make a big dramatic entrance.

Also this. At the very least if your DM isn't aware of it, solos really improved in the MM3 and everything published after it. Which is the two Monster Vaults, the Dark Sun monster book, and...I couldn't name the others without date-checking. Anyway, make sure your DM is aware of this fact, and that there are fan-made resources to help update MM1 & MM2 monsters.

And the rest is solid advice too!

 

[Tony Vargas]

Maybe playing and running AD&D for so many years lowered my bar for what constitutes a 'sweet spot' too much?
;(