Whoa. 4e is hard on PC mortality rates.

[Wisdom Penalty]

Anyone else notice this? A "standard" encounter in 4e, per the RAW, seems much more difficult than a "standard" encounter in 3e, per the RAW. Evidence is anecdotal only; no math here.

And if you up it a couple notches in 4e, PCs start dropping left and right. I was worried about 4e during the run-up to the release because I felt the death & dying rules would make it much too easy for PCs to live forever. That does not seem to be the case. Not in the slightest.

I generally run and enjoy playing in grittier, more difficult campaigns - so this paradigm is not a negative one. That said, some of my players and I are sitting back after test encounters and doing the Homer Simpson blink-blink. This ain't your daddy's D&D.

Or maybe it is, as it reminds me of the last time I saw such PC gore and that was 1e.

Not saying it's good or bad, as this type of thing is clearly tied only to groups and their favored play styles. But I am curious whether other folks out there are also noticing this new game has some tough challenges boxed within it under the "standard" encounter header.

Wis

 

[MerricB]

You should have seen my 3e games - PCs dropped all the time. The system was just so swingy... (in 1e/2e, I think I fudged more).

One of the features of 3e was that the first three or four encounters were really easy because the PCs had all of their powers. By the fourth or fifth encounter, they'd run out of their good abilities and the last one was difficult.

Alternatively, you played a Paizo adventure and almost all the encounters were deathtraps so you had to rest after each one...

It's likely with 4e that all encounters are harder because the PCs abilities don't diminish in the same way. Monsters also gain power more slowly, so a couple of "harder" encounters won't be as difficult when compared to a normal encounter. Difficult, yes. In 3e, a harder encounter got very hard, very quickly. The power curve in 3e was insane for monsters.

Cheers!

 

[Christian]

My impression of 4E so far (which is admittedly meager) is that it's a lot easier to tell that you're in over your head before the situation gets hopeless. If you accidentally started a fight with a critter 6 or 8 CR above your level, two-thirds of your party ends up missing a save-or-die in the first round, and the rest get disintegrated trying to flee. That situation seems to be less dire in 4E ...

 

[Gladius Legis]

I've noticed this as well, and this is a good thing for two reasons:

1) I like difficult combats in general. 4e does a good job of making combats challenging without the WTH moments, and

2) It's making the whole crowd that spouted all this "4e combat will be too easy/dummied down/not threatening" FUD eat a whole lot of crow.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Huh. My experience so far has actually been that 4E has a lower mortality rate than 3E. I think it's the first campaign I've been in a long time where nobody's died (lots of "dropping below 0 hp," but no dying all the way to almost 10th level.

That said, we have retreated* from a few fights, which was something almost unheard of in 3E.

*For values of retreat that = run screaming, or frantically negotiate your way out of a hopeless situation.

 

[Gothmog]

Yep, I've noticed this too. An equal encounter level fight can be pretty rough, especially if the players don't work together and use group tactics. We haven't had any deaths, but lots of unconscious and dying PCs- way more than 3E. Someone trying the "lone wolf" thing in 4E is going to be in a world of hurt, and most likely die. Same thing with characters who won't/can't maneuver, position themselves, and flank.

I do enjoy the tougher battles though- it keeps me one my toes both as a player and DM, and its a lot more fun. 3E combats were just a cakewalk for XP until after 4 or 5 encounters, and only then did foes pose any sort of threat (barring save or die effects). So 4E combat is much more fun and challenging on that account.

And I agree with Mouseferatu- as a player we've retreated from several fights, and the players in the game I DM have fled screaming from two encounters so far (not that hard either, level +1 in both cases).

 

[Darrin Drader]

One of my friends was running KotS and we almost ended up with TPK in two out of three encounters. Then at the end, he mentioned to us that the encounters were really designed for 5 PCs instead of four, and he didn't actually adjust anything to take into account the smaller party. Even so, I agree that combat seems to be a bit more lethal than it was before.

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

(look of approval)

Anyone is welcome to their own style of game, of course. I prefer games where the base mortality rate is 50% plus or minus the competency and creativity of the players (in other words, don't really try and it's going to be messy; try hard and everyone will make it.)

 

[Nifft]

Irontooth has a high PC mortality rate.

4e in general? Not so much.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Mouseferatu]

And I agree with Mouseferatu- as a player we've retreated from several fights, and the players in the game I DM have fled screaming from two encounters so far (not that hard either, level +1 in both cases).

The funny thing is, we've beaten encounters that were 4 higher than our level, but we've been forced to flee from fights that were level +1.

Just goes to show how important good strategy (and access to one's daily powers) can be.

(Plus, uh, luck of course.)