Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Older Editions
The Quadratic Problem—Speculations on 4e
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Wulf Ratbane" data-source="post: 3746734" data-attributes="member: 94"><p><strong>The Quadratic Problem—Speculations on 4e</strong></p><p></p><p>At its heart, D&D is a game of tactical combat, and the core mechanics are designed to serve this function. The problem with 3e was not that the power curve scaled exponentially, but that the curve was too steep. As a consequence, the period of optimum play (usually described as the “sweet spot”) was too short.</p><p></p><p>In fact, <em>Power</em> must always scale exponentially—in fact, it scales <em>quadratically</em>. Let’s look at why.</p><p></p><p><strong> Linear Advancement</strong></p><p>We all remember <em>f(x)= mx + b</em> from our algebra days. This is the equation for a line. To apply this equation to a character’s power advancement, <em>m</em> is the slope, or rate of advancement; <em>x</em> is the number of levels advanced (or, character level-1), and <em>b</em> is the baseline level of power (its actual value is not important but can be substituted as “what we can expect from a 1st level character").</p><p></p><p><strong>But Power Is a Quadratic Function</strong></p><p>The problem is that power does not, and can not, scale linearly; it is a <em>quadratic</em> function. Why?</p><p></p><p>When we analyze how powerful a character is in combat, it is a product of offense and defense: How much damage can he do and how long can he do it? </p><p></p><p>Let us say that each PC has a “combat rating” <em>CR</em>. His CR is a function of his “expected damage output per action” (k, for kill power), multiplied by the number of actions he can be expected to perform before he is neutralized, or, his staying power (T, a time variable). </p><p></p><p>CR= (k)(T)</p><p></p><p>Now, look at what happens when a character advances in level. His effective offense increases linearly, true enough; and so does his staying power (whether by increases in hit points, AC, defenses, etc.)</p><p></p><p>His kill power advances linearly: <em>k = mx+b</em>; where <em>m</em> is the rate of offensive advancement, <em>x</em> is the number of levels he has gained, and <em>b</em> is his starting point.</p><p></p><p>His staying power advances linearly: <em>T = dx+a</em>, where <em>d</em> is the rate of defensive advancement, <em>x</em> is (again) the number of levels he has gained, and <em>a</em> is his starting point.</p><p></p><p>It is also very important to note that <em>m</em> and <em>d</em>, the rates of advancement, are <em>relative</em> to <em>b</em> and <em>a</em>— these increments are relative to the starting values at 1st level.</p><p></p><p>Thus, </p><p></p><p>CR=(k)(T)</p><p></p><p>And substituting for our linear advancement rates we see </p><p></p><p>CR= (mx+b)(dx+a)</p><p></p><p>As you can see, the product of two (non-zero) linear advancement rates <em>must be</em> quadratic:</p><p></p><p>CR=(mdx[sup]2[/sup])+(mxa)+(dxb)+ab</p><p></p><p><strong>Specific Analyses</strong></p><p></p><p>Let’s begin at 1st level, where <em>x</em> is 0—the character has not yet advanced.</p><p></p><p>Most of the equation drops out, leaving us with </p><p></p><p>CR = ab</p><p></p><p>Remember, <em>a</em> and <em>b</em> are our baseline, starting 1st level defense and offense levels. We could arbitrarily set them both to “1” just as a shorthand for “about the amount of offense and defense we can expect from a 1st level character.”</p><p></p><p>In which case, at 1st level, CR=1.</p><p></p><p>We know for sure that a 1st level fighter has more staying power (in both hit points and AC) than a 1st level wizard; but we also know that a properly prepared wizard can inflict many more kills than the fighter. <em>Sleep, color spray</em>, and <em>burning hands</em>, even at 1st level, is a lot of “kill power” for the wizard.</p><p></p><p>We can all probably agree that the design of the wizard is to trade offensive smack-down for his relative fragility.</p><p></p><p>If the classes are balanced, however, we can also assume that the product <em>ab</em> is probably about the same, even if <em>a</em> and <em>b</em> are reversed and/or adjusted from class to class.</p><p></p><p>Notice also that the staying power of the wizard is also directly related to his spells per day. When he’s out of applicable spells, he’s effectively neutralized with respect to the fighter. You don’t have to kill a wizard to “kill” him in terms of his combat effectiveness.</p><p></p><p><strong>Levelling Up</strong></p><p>Let’s look at what happens when these two level up. In 3e, their hit points double—doubling their staying power. And, in the case of the wizard in particular, his offense just about doubles—his burning hands goes from 1d4 to 2d4. The fighter, of course, doesn’t enjoy this doubling effect—his BAB goes up, of course, and he may be able to make an extra attack through the use of feats, but he certainly doesn’t get to double the base damage output of his longsword. By 2nd level, he’s already falling behind.</p><p></p><p><strong>Flattening the Curve</strong></p><p>The power curve will never be linear—you don't hear many references to the power line. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin :D" data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> </p><p></p><p>But we <em>can</em> change its shape and try to smooth it out by changing the underlying linear rates of advancement of both offense and defense (<em>m</em> and <em>d</em>, respectively) and we can change our starting baselines (<em>a</em> and <em>b</em>) to shift the curve into a more suitable range of play.</p><p></p><p><img src="http://www.badaxegames.com/mm/pdf/SL/power.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " data-size="" style="" /></p><p></p><p>The attached chart shows several options for changing the power curve. </p><p></p><p><span style="color: red">Series 1 shows the current power curve of 3e. The starting values <em>a</em> and <em>b</em> are both set to 1 and the linear advancement rate of both offense and defense <em>m</em> and <em>d</em> are also set to 1. All variables are set to 1, so power scales 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, etc.</span></p><p></p><p><span style="color: orange">Series 2 shows a proposed power curve. In this example, we start 1st level character with twice as much staying power as before; but the linear rates of advancement for offense and defense are dialed down to 2/3 and ½, respectively.</span></p><p></p><p><span style="color: green">Series 3 is identical to Series 2, but offense and defense both increment at a ½ rate.</span></p><p></p><p><span style="color: blue">Series 4 is the “rat bastard” power curve—1st level characters do not receive any additional HD, <em>and</em> both the offense and defense advancements are dialed down to ½. Notice that the shape of the blue Series 4 curve is the same shape as the green Series 3 curve, but there is a baseline shift.</span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Wulf Ratbane, post: 3746734, member: 94"] [b]The Quadratic Problem—Speculations on 4e[/b] At its heart, D&D is a game of tactical combat, and the core mechanics are designed to serve this function. The problem with 3e was not that the power curve scaled exponentially, but that the curve was too steep. As a consequence, the period of optimum play (usually described as the “sweet spot”) was too short. In fact, [i]Power[/i] must always scale exponentially—in fact, it scales [i]quadratically[/i]. Let’s look at why. [b] Linear Advancement[/b] We all remember [i]f(x)= mx + b[/i] from our algebra days. This is the equation for a line. To apply this equation to a character’s power advancement, [i]m[/i] is the slope, or rate of advancement; [i]x[/i] is the number of levels advanced (or, character level-1), and [i]b[/i] is the baseline level of power (its actual value is not important but can be substituted as “what we can expect from a 1st level character"). [b]But Power Is a Quadratic Function[/b] The problem is that power does not, and can not, scale linearly; it is a [i]quadratic[/i] function. Why? When we analyze how powerful a character is in combat, it is a product of offense and defense: How much damage can he do and how long can he do it? Let us say that each PC has a “combat rating” [i]CR[/i]. His CR is a function of his “expected damage output per action” (k, for kill power), multiplied by the number of actions he can be expected to perform before he is neutralized, or, his staying power (T, a time variable). CR= (k)(T) Now, look at what happens when a character advances in level. His effective offense increases linearly, true enough; and so does his staying power (whether by increases in hit points, AC, defenses, etc.) His kill power advances linearly: [i]k = mx+b[/i]; where [i]m[/i] is the rate of offensive advancement, [i]x[/i] is the number of levels he has gained, and [i]b[/i] is his starting point. His staying power advances linearly: [i]T = dx+a[/i], where [i]d[/i] is the rate of defensive advancement, [i]x[/i] is (again) the number of levels he has gained, and [i]a[/i] is his starting point. It is also very important to note that [i]m[/i] and [i]d[/i], the rates of advancement, are [i]relative[/i] to [i]b[/i] and [i]a[/i]— these increments are relative to the starting values at 1st level. Thus, CR=(k)(T) And substituting for our linear advancement rates we see CR= (mx+b)(dx+a) As you can see, the product of two (non-zero) linear advancement rates [i]must be[/i] quadratic: CR=(mdx[sup]2[/sup])+(mxa)+(dxb)+ab [b]Specific Analyses[/b] Let’s begin at 1st level, where [i]x[/i] is 0—the character has not yet advanced. Most of the equation drops out, leaving us with CR = ab Remember, [i]a[/i] and [i]b[/i] are our baseline, starting 1st level defense and offense levels. We could arbitrarily set them both to “1” just as a shorthand for “about the amount of offense and defense we can expect from a 1st level character.” In which case, at 1st level, CR=1. We know for sure that a 1st level fighter has more staying power (in both hit points and AC) than a 1st level wizard; but we also know that a properly prepared wizard can inflict many more kills than the fighter. [i]Sleep, color spray[/i], and [i]burning hands[/i], even at 1st level, is a lot of “kill power” for the wizard. We can all probably agree that the design of the wizard is to trade offensive smack-down for his relative fragility. If the classes are balanced, however, we can also assume that the product [i]ab[/i] is probably about the same, even if [i]a[/i] and [i]b[/i] are reversed and/or adjusted from class to class. Notice also that the staying power of the wizard is also directly related to his spells per day. When he’s out of applicable spells, he’s effectively neutralized with respect to the fighter. You don’t have to kill a wizard to “kill” him in terms of his combat effectiveness. [b]Levelling Up[/b] Let’s look at what happens when these two level up. In 3e, their hit points double—doubling their staying power. And, in the case of the wizard in particular, his offense just about doubles—his burning hands goes from 1d4 to 2d4. The fighter, of course, doesn’t enjoy this doubling effect—his BAB goes up, of course, and he may be able to make an extra attack through the use of feats, but he certainly doesn’t get to double the base damage output of his longsword. By 2nd level, he’s already falling behind. [b]Flattening the Curve[/b] The power curve will never be linear—you don't hear many references to the power line. :D But we [i]can[/i] change its shape and try to smooth it out by changing the underlying linear rates of advancement of both offense and defense ([i]m[/i] and [i]d[/i], respectively) and we can change our starting baselines ([i]a[/i] and [i]b[/i]) to shift the curve into a more suitable range of play. [img]http://www.badaxegames.com/mm/pdf/SL/power.jpg[/img] The attached chart shows several options for changing the power curve. [color=red]Series 1 shows the current power curve of 3e. The starting values [i]a[/i] and [i]b[/i] are both set to 1 and the linear advancement rate of both offense and defense [i]m[/i] and [i]d[/i] are also set to 1. All variables are set to 1, so power scales 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, etc.[/color] [color=orange]Series 2 shows a proposed power curve. In this example, we start 1st level character with twice as much staying power as before; but the linear rates of advancement for offense and defense are dialed down to 2/3 and ½, respectively.[/color] [color=green]Series 3 is identical to Series 2, but offense and defense both increment at a ½ rate.[/color] [color=blue]Series 4 is the “rat bastard” power curve—1st level characters do not receive any additional HD, [i]and[/i] both the offense and defense advancements are dialed down to ½. Notice that the shape of the blue Series 4 curve is the same shape as the green Series 3 curve, but there is a baseline shift.[/color] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Older Editions
The Quadratic Problem—Speculations on 4e
Top