D&D 4E The Quadratic Problem—Speculations on 4e
- Thread starter Wulf Ratbane
- Start date
Cheiromancer
Adventurer
I think everyone who has played or DMed a campaign has a "feel" about what particular levels are like. If you get the right numbers for them, then perhaps you can identify what causes the change in feel. The relative power of character classes changes changes too much; the increase in power from level to level is too much/not enough; stuff like that. Then if you want to preserve a particular feel, you can try to ensure that the relevant numbers stay within a particular range.
For instance, suppose from 4th to 5th level the power of characters changes by 25%, and that feels about right. But from 5th to 6th it is 33%, and that seems a little high. From 6th to 7th is 40%, and that is definitely too fast. From 7th to 8th is 45%, and it's starting to get unfun. Etc.. Then we have something to fiddle with. Stretch the progression so the old level 8 is now level 9, or something.
But to do this you need to know more about the 3e than to say that it is unsatisfactory. I'm just making those numbers up - but if they were right, then it would indicate that an exponential progression is OK, but that the current system is steeper than e^kx. More like e^k(x^2) or something. But I'm just making numbers up.
Another example: Suppose you wonder what the 4E fighter is going to be like. How do you preserve his relative power without iterative attacks? What if he is without statboosters? Or without enhancement bonuses to attack, damage and AC? (I.e. suppose the "big six" are gone). Then it's kinda helpful to have some numbers to work with. How powerful is a 14th level fighter, and can you build a plausible 30 level progression that ends up in that power. Or 20 level progression - my suspicion is that the game will end up around 18-20th level in terms of power, and so the old 14th will be around level 20.
This is a different point, and maybe I should post it separately. Nah, I hate doubleposting. I'll tie it in with my earlier remarks somehow.
Two different progressions can end up in quite different power levels, depending on the initial choices. See my OgreN and OrcN progressions for a counter-intuitive example. The power level depends very sensitively on the boosts available to AC and attack bonuses; it ends up that the exponential extrapolation of a high AC monster ends up a lot weaker than a low AC monster. Well, it is counter-intuitive to me, at least.
Anyway, once we decide on what the best power curve would be (and I think this requires diagnosing a little more precisely what is wrong with the current power curve), there are still details to be worked out. I'd be happy to talk about that, but I think we still need a diagnosis. Which brings me back to my earlier remarks.
For instance, suppose from 4th to 5th level the power of characters changes by 25%, and that feels about right. But from 5th to 6th it is 33%, and that seems a little high. From 6th to 7th is 40%, and that is definitely too fast. From 7th to 8th is 45%, and it's starting to get unfun. Etc.. Then we have something to fiddle with. Stretch the progression so the old level 8 is now level 9, or something.
But to do this you need to know more about the 3e than to say that it is unsatisfactory. I'm just making those numbers up - but if they were right, then it would indicate that an exponential progression is OK, but that the current system is steeper than e^kx. More like e^k(x^2) or something. But I'm just making numbers up.
Another example: Suppose you wonder what the 4E fighter is going to be like. How do you preserve his relative power without iterative attacks? What if he is without statboosters? Or without enhancement bonuses to attack, damage and AC? (I.e. suppose the "big six" are gone). Then it's kinda helpful to have some numbers to work with. How powerful is a 14th level fighter, and can you build a plausible 30 level progression that ends up in that power. Or 20 level progression - my suspicion is that the game will end up around 18-20th level in terms of power, and so the old 14th will be around level 20.
Wulf Ratbane said:
This is a different point, and maybe I should post it separately. Nah, I hate doubleposting. I'll tie it in with my earlier remarks somehow.
Two different progressions can end up in quite different power levels, depending on the initial choices. See my OgreN and OrcN progressions for a counter-intuitive example. The power level depends very sensitively on the boosts available to AC and attack bonuses; it ends up that the exponential extrapolation of a high AC monster ends up a lot weaker than a low AC monster. Well, it is counter-intuitive to me, at least.
Anyway, once we decide on what the best power curve would be (and I think this requires diagnosing a little more precisely what is wrong with the current power curve), there are still details to be worked out. I'd be happy to talk about that, but I think we still need a diagnosis. Which brings me back to my earlier remarks.
Wulf Ratbane
Adventurer
Cheiromancer said:
The clouds keep rolling past regardless.
Cheiromancer
Adventurer
Wulf Ratbane said:The clouds keep rolling past regardless.
Well, you started the thread. Maybe we went off-topic a little, but perhaps you gained something from our discursions. What do you want to do next? What power curve do you want to explore, and how do you think we should stat up the initial brutes?
I'm really wondering about the AC business. Will an nth level character have higher AC than a monster N? How often *should* a monsterN hit an nth level character? How fast should attacks and ACs change as a function of level?
Speaking as a scientist...
I think the mainstay of what this discussion shows is simply the variables in 3.5e are not well defined in terms of power, and it is not well defined what the variables should be per level.
Notice: AC, hit points, to-hit and average damage per hit can all be very different between two characters of the same level. Even ones of the same class.
Especially if they have different ability scores.
What I'd love to see in 4e -- and I doubt this will happen -- is, at least for combat, for there to be some known and specified number of stats that directly modify combat.
And make it obvious just how important each one is. How much better is +1 AC to +1 HP?
And in particular, I'd love to be able to exchange AC for hit points and vice versa.
Of course, what I really want is the continued heroization of DnD.
Or in the very least, for there to be an easy and off-the-cuff way to compare the power levels of two characters that does not involve some heady math that your typical DnDer can't or won't do.
I think the mainstay of what this discussion shows is simply the variables in 3.5e are not well defined in terms of power, and it is not well defined what the variables should be per level.
Notice: AC, hit points, to-hit and average damage per hit can all be very different between two characters of the same level. Even ones of the same class.
Especially if they have different ability scores.
What I'd love to see in 4e -- and I doubt this will happen -- is, at least for combat, for there to be some known and specified number of stats that directly modify combat.
And make it obvious just how important each one is. How much better is +1 AC to +1 HP?
And in particular, I'd love to be able to exchange AC for hit points and vice versa.
Of course, what I really want is the continued heroization of DnD.
Or in the very least, for there to be an easy and off-the-cuff way to compare the power levels of two characters that does not involve some heady math that your typical DnDer can't or won't do.
Wulf Ratbane
Adventurer
Cheiromancer said:
My reply wasn't meant to be snarky-- just to point out that we'll be seeing 4e regardless of how we choose to spend our time speculatin' in the meantime.
A 1st level Fighter should be 4x as powerful as a 1st level Orc Brute. Rationale: 5 PCs vs. 5 Orcs is a typical (average, moderate) encounter.
I'd imagine BAB, AC, and DPS about equal (rationale: I can't imagine any of these factors doubling power vis a vis the orc), and thus I assume the 1st level Fighter has 4HD. Just a guess.
And although all classes are not strictly "equal," I'd imagine that any 1st level PC of any class, with 4HD, can take on a single orc.
Personally, I think 4HD seems too powerful.
We have also seen mentioned that a typical (5-man, 4e) party "can" tackle 20 goblins. That's 4 goblins per PC. I don't know if that would be a difficult fight or still an average one, but it was mentioned as "doable."
Brute over brute (ie, Fighter) I expect PCs to maintain a 4x power ratio to monsters, so that the 5-vs-5 encounter format holds.
I mentioned it a couple of pages back:
1) Take a 1st level brute (Orc), stat him out "however." Give him a +0 BAB at 1st level, 16 STR, 14 AC, average dps weapon like a falchion, and 1 HD.
2) Now design the 1st level PC that can handle this guy as an "average" encounter. Remember that we'll be throwing 5 of the above orcs at 5 PCs, and that this fight can't possibly be 50/50. It must fall somewhere between current "moderate" and "difficult."
3) Now we have our 1st level Brute and our 1st level PC. The next step is to level up the PC. What increment? Well, it has to be meaningful, but it won't be exponential. I predict that BAB will not go up 1:1, not even for fighters. I imagine it will come down, maybe 2/3. AC will probably go up as a function of gold pieces spent, or maybe even class bonus (although I am doubtful on that)-- but all things considered, assume a +1 AC gain at 2nd level. And I think we can also assume a gain of 1 HD. (Obviously I think HD is the easiest and safest way to increment staying power.)
4) Now we have a 2nd level PC. So, to preserve the 5:5 encounter power ratio, he will be 4x as powerful as a 2nd level monster. Based on 2nd level Fighter, increment the 2nd level brute so that the power ratio is preserved.
That's how I'd proceed, continuing through all levels. To summarize:
1) Start with the baseline brute.
2) Use that to derive the 1st level PC.
3) Increment the PC to 2nd level based on realistic assumptions about what we can change on the power curve.
4) Derive the 2nd level brute.
5) Repeat steps 3 and 4. (Increment the PC, derive the brute.)
If my thinking is off, let me know!
Cheiromancer
Adventurer
Do you have Star Wars Saga? I don't, but I heard that the starting hp were higher. Dunno what they did with BAB progressions.
Anyone know? And how about the method of devising combats. Was it based on 1 monster per encounter, or was it 5 opponents per encounter?
Really, having 4 or 5 monsters per encounter is a lot more stable than just one monster. It's a good 4E idea.
edit
I should probably look closely at gneech's page:
http://www.gneech.com/swordandsorcery/index.html
It adopts Star Wars Saga to sword and sorcery, and if Saga really is a preview of 4e... well, it looks interesting, anyway.
Anyone know? And how about the method of devising combats. Was it based on 1 monster per encounter, or was it 5 opponents per encounter?
Really, having 4 or 5 monsters per encounter is a lot more stable than just one monster. It's a good 4E idea.
edit
I should probably look closely at gneech's page:
http://www.gneech.com/swordandsorcery/index.html
It adopts Star Wars Saga to sword and sorcery, and if Saga really is a preview of 4e... well, it looks interesting, anyway.
Last edited:
Wulf Ratbane
Adventurer
Cheiromancer said:
Yes indeed. Very handy (I don't have SAGA either, but will probably pick it up...)
Looks like 3HD to start.
Also, look at Flame Pillar on p. 40, I found it "thought provoking."
Aust Diamondew
First Post
Saga starting HP max first level HD times 3 plus other modifiers (constitution).
If you were to use the same rule in DnD and fighter with a 16 constitution would have 33 starting HP.
Saves start out a little better all around. BAB and other stuff is pretty much the same starting as D&D.
NPCs are a lot weaker in saga also (NPC class is d4 HD, cleric BAB, 3 starting feats/proficiencies, no save bonuses, 1+int skills).
Ofc you can give NPCs levels in heroic classes too but typical grunts will use the NPC class.
If you were to use the same rule in DnD and fighter with a 16 constitution would have 33 starting HP.
Saves start out a little better all around. BAB and other stuff is pretty much the same starting as D&D.
NPCs are a lot weaker in saga also (NPC class is d4 HD, cleric BAB, 3 starting feats/proficiencies, no save bonuses, 1+int skills).
Ofc you can give NPCs levels in heroic classes too but typical grunts will use the NPC class.
Mustrum_Ridcully
Legend
An interesting "side" topic: How should multiclassing be balanced? How gestalting?
We might not that Fighter20 has 4,000 times the power of a Fighter1, but how about a
Wizard10/Fighter10 to a Fighter20? The power ratio is certainly not 1:1.
How about a Wizard15/Fighter15 to a Fighter 20? The power ration might be higher than 1:1, but maybe not?
The problem obviously is that we have no real guidelines yet on how to gauge the power of a spellcaster, especially since we concentrate on power per round or per combat, not per day.
We might not that Fighter20 has 4,000 times the power of a Fighter1, but how about a
Wizard10/Fighter10 to a Fighter20? The power ratio is certainly not 1:1.
How about a Wizard15/Fighter15 to a Fighter 20? The power ration might be higher than 1:1, but maybe not?
The problem obviously is that we have no real guidelines yet on how to gauge the power of a spellcaster, especially since we concentrate on power per round or per combat, not per day.
Similar Threads
D&D 3E/3.5
Homebrew Content
