D&D 4E The biggest claim about 4E that intrigues me
- Thread starter Treebore
- Start date
Whizbang Dustyboots
Gnometown Hero
Don't read the 4E board, then?megamania said:
Li Shenron
Legend
On the surface it sounds great...
However there is a risk that they mean the game is going to feel the same at any level.
In 3ed playing at level 1 is different than playing at level 6, or level 12 or level 20. That's a GREAT feature! Different challenges, different types of resource management, different ways to solve obstacles etc. It's especially different to play a spellcaster: at low levels it's all about casting the few spells at the right time, at high levels it's all about stacking your buffs and protections in the most convenient way. I admit that I always have lots of problems running a 3ed game beyond level 15th (or even earlier), I'd like to think that given time I'll manage it tho... But after we go very high up in level, it doesn't feel bad at the end of the campaign to go back at 1st to start the next, because there are challenges which are unique to low levels, and they don't become too easy even for players that have played the high levels.
I like the way it is, because it's like having 3-4 different games in the same ruleset. And although I would definitely appreciate any simplification for the DM's job, I really wish for "extending the sweet spot" not to mean making the gaming experience the same at all levels. If that's what I wanted, I could just always play at the same level range.
However there is a risk that they mean the game is going to feel the same at any level.
In 3ed playing at level 1 is different than playing at level 6, or level 12 or level 20. That's a GREAT feature! Different challenges, different types of resource management, different ways to solve obstacles etc. It's especially different to play a spellcaster: at low levels it's all about casting the few spells at the right time, at high levels it's all about stacking your buffs and protections in the most convenient way. I admit that I always have lots of problems running a 3ed game beyond level 15th (or even earlier), I'd like to think that given time I'll manage it tho... But after we go very high up in level, it doesn't feel bad at the end of the campaign to go back at 1st to start the next, because there are challenges which are unique to low levels, and they don't become too easy even for players that have played the high levels.
I like the way it is, because it's like having 3-4 different games in the same ruleset. And although I would definitely appreciate any simplification for the DM's job, I really wish for "extending the sweet spot" not to mean making the gaming experience the same at all levels. If that's what I wanted, I could just always play at the same level range.
Someone
Adventurer
Treebore said:
The assertions that interest me the most are "you don't break the game if you don't have the recommended value of magic items" "you don't break the game if you don't have a balanced party" "you don't beak the game if you don't run 4 encounters/day" and "you don't have to fear DMing a high level adventure"
If they manage to do all of that (without breaking things that work OK in 3.5), I'll convert in a second.
Li Shenron said:
I completely agree. What should be done, IMHO, is making low level characters a little less fragile to prevent frustration, and make the system stick together at high levels instead of falling apart into pieces like in 3E. Other than that, the shift in play styles is very good as it is. Weak characters should face different challenges in different ways than grizzled and famous heroes. Otherwise, where's the fun in reaching high levels if the game just stays the same, only everything has more HP and deals more damage?
trancejeremy
Adventurer
thalmin said:
That sounds downright D&D-ish, with Paragon = the Companion set and Epic = Master set.
Time to bring back Mystara/Known World!
Similar Threads
