Why must numbers go up?

[ExploderWizard]

One module series published about ten years into the edition's life. Yup, that's massive support. Compare that to how many "stabbing bigger enemies" type modules? Q1, S1-4, Isle of the Ape, and I'm sure there are more. Yeah, the game was ALL about managing armies and whatnot.

Sigh. No, I'm not going to do this. I've had more than my fill of edition wars. If you want to discuss the merits of various math systems for games, that's fine. You want to drag this into the abyss of pissing contests about what different editions are "about"? Count me out.

Im not trying to engage you in an edition war. I gave examples of ways that growing characters can experience different challenges that are fresh and new to them rather than just keep hitting higher target numbers doing the same things over and over.

That concept is to me, sort of edition neutral. I could care less about the percentage of support a particular game provides for such concepts.

My current campaign is 4E. When we get to paragon tier I plan on including options for building fortifications, attracting followers, and engaging in activities that involve more than combat and skill challenges.

As of now, the rules provide zero support for what I want to do. This won't even serve as a speedbump to stop me from doing it anyway. Mechanics do not get to decide on my campaign style. My campaign will be "about" whatever we decide it is regardless of the rules we play with.

 

[Stoat]

My current campaign is 4E. When we get to paragon tier I plan on including options for building fortifications, attracting followers, and engaging in activities that involve more than combat and skill challenges.

As of now, the rules provide zero support for what I want to do. This won't even serve as a speedbump to stop me from doing it anyway. Mechanics do not get to decide on my campaign style. My campaign will be "about" whatever we decide it is regardless of the rules we play with.

Off topic, but I'm curious what rules you will be using. My (mid-heroic tier) PC's are about to take over a small village, and I'm digging around for mechanics to use.

 

[Fifth Element]

It is a result that effectively means no meaningful change from level 1 to 30. The numbers get bigger and the monsters change thier skins but it is still a measured uphill struggle against the same types of obstacles for 30 levels. I see what the saying "the game remains the same" means now and I don't care for it.

I really don't get this. If you're always fighting opponents of an equivalent level, you should have about the same chance, mathematically, to overcome them. And mechanically it's similar, in that your roll dice and try to deal enough damage to reduce their hit points to nil.

But fighting 1st-level kobolds compared to fighting 30th-level pit fiends? If that really feels the same, then your DM isn't trying hard enough.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Off topic, but I'm curious what rules you will be using. My (mid-heroic tier) PC's are about to take over a small village, and I'm digging around for mechanics to use.

I don't have anything concrete developed yet. The foundation is set up though. Except for potions/and small trinkets, there is no magic item economy so the players can relax and spend thier money on things other than the best upgrades. When I come up with something to start then I plan on starting a thread in the house rules forum.

 

[Hussar]

EW - I'd be interested in seeing that. Might I suggest a separate mechanic that is divorced from pretty much everything else? A whole new "silo" that only deals with "kingdom building". Exactly how that works, I have pretty much no idea. But, that's the direction I think I'd take for something like this.

Im not trying to engage you in an edition war. I gave examples of ways that growing characters can experience different challenges that are fresh and new to them rather than just keep hitting higher target numbers doing the same things over and over.

The problem is, you've decided that the only challenge can be combat. Since the numbers don't actually scale exactly perfectly for all things, the increased numbers simply give you the ability to expand the options that you can choose.

If the numbers remained static for everything, you don't get enough wiggle room to include differing challenges.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I really don't get this. If you're always fighting opponents of an equivalent level, you should have about the same chance, mathematically, to overcome them. And mechanically it's similar, in that your roll dice and try to deal enough damage to reduce their hit points to nil.

But fighting 1st-level kobolds compared to fighting 30th-level pit fiends? If that really feels the same, then your DM isn't trying hard enough.

The landscapes, enemies, and even the stakes change considerably over the levels but that doesn't change the basic flow of play. There is a threat, the PC's come on the scene and beat it up through a combination of combat and skillfighting, gather thier rewards and move on to the next threat which may feature higher stakes and better rewards but is otherwise similar.

Doing something to break out of that formula is what I am talking about. Continuing in that style for 30 levels may be satisfying for some players. I am not one of them.

 

[ExploderWizard]

EW - I'd be interested in seeing that. Might I suggest a separate mechanic that is divorced from pretty much everything else? A whole new "silo" that only deals with "kingdom building". Exactly how that works, I have pretty much no idea. But, that's the direction I think I'd take for something like this.

When I can create something that is good enough to share, I will.

The problem is, you've decided that the only challenge can be combat.

Not at all. I include skill challenges in that basic formula too.

 

[pemerton]

Adventurers stepped into the role of leaders, led armies, and needed to deal with problems that sometimes couldn't be solved with sword or spell.

It is sad that the story of D&D now never really leaves the dungeon.

I don't think this is quite right.

It ignores skill challenges - which is where non-sword/spell solutions are now located in the 4e mechanics. And it ignores the fact that defeating Orcus is not in any real sense "just another dungeon encounter".

Having GMed combat heavy RM games from level 1 to the mid-20s, I know from experience that just because the relative chance of success in combat is not changing dramatically (as numbers on both sides go up), the flavour and tactical considerations in play can change pretty dramatically. Although I haven't yet GMed D&D 43 to the same levels, looking through the MM and the player options suggests to me that it will be much the same - as the story progresses, the flavour, tactics and plot details (including skill challenges) will change quite a bit.

 

[Wiseblood]

- as the story progresses, the flavour, tactics and plot details (including skill challenges) will change quite a bit.

I agree, this however does not require inflated numbers.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I don't think this is quite right.

It ignores skill challenges - which is where non-sword/spell solutions are now located in the 4e mechanics.

I didn't forget or ignore skill challenges. A skill challenge is certainly a scaled challenge that is not a combat. It is still a scaled challenge designed to keep hitting ever increasing target numbers as bonuses pile up to a level that make the d20 roll look like a paltry side dish next to the bonus.

The difficulty needed for a particular task just keeps pace with character "improvement" resulting in more or less the same raw numbers needed on the die from level 1 to 30.

The skill challenge or skillfight simply substitutes number of successful rolls for enemy hitpoints and number of failures for the PC's hitpoints. If the PC's reduce the challenge to 0 hitpoints before they reach 0 hitpoints then they win the skillfight.

The only thing that changes then really is the complexity of the challenge (monster level)

And it ignores the fact that defeating Orcus is not in any real sense "just another dungeon encounter".

Certainly not. He is a campaign ending other planar elite boss monster.

This means that the numbers involved will be more ridiculous than ever.

Having GMed combat heavy RM games from level 1 to the mid-20s, I know from experience that just because the relative chance of success in combat is not changing dramatically (as numbers on both sides go up), the flavour and tactical considerations in play can change pretty dramatically. Although I haven't yet GMed D&D 43 to the same levels, looking through the MM and the player options suggests to me that it will be much the same - as the story progresses, the flavour, tactics and plot details (including skill challenges) will change quite a bit.

Flavor, tactics, and plot details are all elements that can be present without the addition of measured scaling.

All of these numbers going up,changing tactics and so forth does not offer a change to the basic play dynamic or anything truly new.

The window dressing changes but you are still just monster hunting and skill fighting for 30 levels. This is the major thing I plan on changing for my campaign.