|
They are gearing the game to include 30 levels of play. They are marketing the game towards a younger crowd, including the MMORPG crowd.
I think you will probably level every other session in this next incarnation of D&D, instead of every 3-5 like now. Pandering to those with the short attention spans and large allowances. Marketing genius!
FH
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
Depends.
I would say slower, 'cause it seems like you can really blaze through levels right now.
But, WotC has said that they are going to try to increase the "sweet spot" of levels significantly. Also, I think they're looking at 30 levels of play as the norm as opposed to the 20 we're all used to.
So...depends on their model and what they come up with.
EDIT: Beaten by Fakey!
Granted, my expereinces could be different from others, but in the games I've been apart of, we have people leveling once a session, sometimes twice if we're at the beginning of a campaign and everyone's at the low levels.
Considering that, I am amazed a people who say that they take 3-5 sessions to go up a level. I'd cringe at the thought of playing at that slow a rate. Granted, considering my group ussually only gets together once every 1-2 months we might cram more game in than others in the typical session.
But that said, what is a "session" when considering 3-5 sessions? one session for us ussually entails 6-8 hours of gaming every 4 to 8 weeks.
|
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
Granted, my expereinces could be different from others, but in the games I've been apart of, we have people leveling once a session, sometimes twice if we're at the beginning of a campaign and everyone's at the low levels.
Argh, see - this is one of my biggest gripes about the current system.
How are you supposed to develop characters, or consistently challenge them appropriately as a DM, when after every few encounters they have new powers and abilities flying out their butt? (I'm sure there is an actual prestige class that allows that, but I digress.)
*goes off grumbling*
How are you supposed to develop characters, or consistently challenge them appropriately as a DM, when after every few encounters they have new powers and abilities flying out their butt?
Stop giving XP for killing things.
I think previous interviews with Chris Perkins have let slip that leveling will be faster because "people like leveling up".
|
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
I think previous interviews with Chris Perkins have let slip that leveling will be faster because "people like leveling up".
Blech, I hadn't heard that.
I remember (and maybe my nostalgia is overly rose-colored) that it used to take quite some time to level up, and it really was something special when it happened.
Ah well, I've been tweaking XP and leveling for years now....so nothing new.
I wonder if people like leveling up or if they just want to be 'bad (censored)'. One of the reasons I do not play MMORGs is I really do not get excited about killing rats for 8 hours just so I can level up to kill bigger rats for another 8 hours.
More emphasis on roleplay, less on rollplay
Oh, are we on about that again?
My pleas fall upon deaf ears. Hack'n'Slash is in. Roleplaying is out.
I think previous interviews with Chris Perkins have let slip that leveling will be faster because "people like leveling up".Blech, I hadn't heard that.
I remember (and maybe my nostalgia is overly rose-colored) that it used to take quite some time to level up, and it really was something special when it happened.
Ah well, I've been tweaking XP and leveling for years now....so nothing new.
I suppose I will confirm JK's rumor; I heard what JK heard: every other session.
In fairness, thats about what our group is hitting at right now anyways. I'm not sayin its right, just sayin....
Slower please.
Same. 3.x rate works fine for me.
Sounds like alot of paperwork. If you level up every other session then you have to update your character sheet every other session. That could be alot of work, then again, that's how they will hook the kids on the DI. Take kids who want instant gratification, think everything should be done for them, and barely have the ability to read and write and vola! you have now created demand for an online tool that does all the work to maintain a character.
The next phase will be to shift those users to an even newer interface (4.5 perhaps, maybe 5.0) that will do ALL the work for the player. They can just play the game at home, wait that's an MMPORG.
4.DOH just just plain stinks.
Sounds like they're trying to capture the Diablo-type gamers, w/ faster leveling, no more dead levels, etc.
I've always appreciated a slower leveling process myself, so that's another new change I'll have to ignore if I ever go to 4th ed. Easy enough to do, I guess. Though the expectations of other players has to factor in as well, unless I'm just playing solo.
W/ 30 levels of standard play, it certainly seems like there's going to be a lot more bookkeeping in changing the character sheets that much more quickly. For those using the DI, this could be easier. For those like me, stock up on pencils...
I believe they have already said that it will be an average of 10 encounters per level up. This is a faster rate than 3.5.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
I've always been of the opinion that 3e didn't level fast enough. Of course, 2e was even slower and it literally took years to get a character beyond level 12 or so.
Then again, our group doesn't play by the normal "4 encounters per day" guideline either. We're usually lucky to have more than 2 encounters in a given in-game day. And, since our gaming sessions typically span only a single day each, this means that, by the book, it takes 2 months per level for my group since we play once a week. Therefore, after a full year of playing every week, you've got about 6-7 levels to show for it.
My characters in the PbP games on these boards are leveling faster than my tabletop characters, and that's sad.
Back in the good old days (AD&D) it took forever to level and you felt you'd earned it. "I levelled!! Drinks on the house!! Strike up the band!!"
3.5 feels a little fast, but OK.
Here's my question. Will a level step in 4E be equivalent to a level step in 3.5 ro will a typical 4E combat look like this:
DM : You dodge the kobald's fart. Level up.
Figther: Cool , I'll take power attack. And swing at the kobald....
DM: It dies a quick, but gratuitously bloody death. Level up.
Fighter : Awesome, I'll take CLeave and since I have the instantaneous feat feat I can apply it on this round....
(20 minutes later)
DM: OK. You've slain all seventy-three kobalds. But at least one scratched your armour.
Back in the good old days (AD&D) it took forever to level and you felt you'd earned it. "I levelled!! Drinks on the house!! Strike up the band!!"
That's because you did earn it in anything but a Monty Haul campaign.
3e had a good guideline to work with ... which lasted about 3 minutes.
4e seems to be going with "level up once every 3 sessions" ... which, if you're going for a more 'old school' feel in advancement, you gotta ratchet down the xp awards in some form or fashion.
If they get the first 3 levels as a quick advancement and then slow it down, it would go a long way towards regaining the feeling of "Holy cow, I made Archmage ?! Break Ereka Eleniak out of that cake fellas [via Temporal Stasis natch], time to partay!!"
Faster than 3.x e? Slower? The same?
I don't care either way, 'cause I can adjust my game as I see fit. I just hope they change the wonky encounter per level guideline, I mean seriously who came up with that 13.333 encounter per level crap?
Oops, beaten to the punch by DaveMage!
The part that I'm somewhat confused on are what appear to be conflicting claims. I believe that these were both mentioned in part 2 of the 4-part GenCon video but I could be mistaken:
* A level 30 character in 4E will be of about the same power as a level 20 in 3.x.
* By going up to level 30, epic level rules are effectively included in the game by default. (Which would imply that 21+ = epic IMO.)
Now the one way I see for it to be possible for both of these to be true is if we are talking about characters with no equipment. In 3.x I really dislike how prestige class and inventory are seemingly the only things that define a character at the higher levels of play. IMO the character wealth by level just gets way too out-of-hand as characters approach 20th level.
At any rate, I'm ambivalent about faster or slower leveling. My group meets maybe once or twice a month for 6-8 hours each time so there's already a pretty good amount of time between level-ups. Also, if the levels are being rebalanced so that the effects of 20 levels are more spread out then that would keep the rate-of-power-increase more managable. While that would mean updating the sheets more often, I have a spiffy database for handling party management and a recycling bin for handling old character sheets. Seems to work well thus far...
|
|
Apparently the following was posted on the Wizards boards by Chris Perkins (I pulled this from EN World).
“The rate at which characters advance is completely in the hands of the DM. This is a D&D truism. The default 4th Edition setting will assume roughly 10 encounters per level, but the DMG will point out that the rate of level advancement is under the DM's control, and that a DM can forestall level advancement by reducing XP awards by half, a third, or whatever.”
Personally, I find this a bit disingenuous. Yes, certainly XP is in the hands of the DM (in one home campaign, I give ½ XP for 3.5) – but I suspect all published modules by WotC and 3rd party publishers will operate under the 10 encounters per level model… and this will particularly affect Adventure Path products. So really, for most of us, if we use published products in 4e, we’ll be advancing every 10 encounters.
While in theory, XP progression will be in the DM’s hands – often the product in our hands will require the 4e prescribed XP advancement. There are ways to mitigate that, but if you want to hand out ½ XP throughout an adventure path, it is going to require a substantial amount of supplemental adventure development to keep the party on track with the required power curve - side treks that (unless deftly handled) could pull focus from the overall story arc.
|
|
Oh – one other thought on 4e level advancement. I don’t think faster leveling is being driven by customers (at least not from the current customer base)… the poll on ENWorld for this shows that about 42% of players want slower leveling, compared to 22% who want faster, and 36% who feel 3e got it just right.
I think faster leveling may be a shrewd business decision designed to have players explore and play out their various character options faster, in order to facilitate launching new editions earlier.
I began in 1e. I think Gygax once said in an old Dragon magazine something like, after the first five levels, you should expect to level one or two times each year.
Back in the 80s, this set up the paradigm that a D&D campaign could stretch on for decades. Many of us had (and some of us still have) campaigns built on this model – games set in homebrew worlds, with characters that have been nurtured for a dozen years or more. This is one of the reasons why a conversion guide was essential from 2e to 3e – they had to find a way to grandfather those legacy campaigns over to the new edition. There were so many of them.
Now 3e broke the mold when it came to XP. Pretty much all of us from the 2e days felt progression was far too slow after 5th level. But many of us were surprised with the rapid acceleration 3e would bring. Playing weekly, I’ve been able to take a character from 1st to 20th level in 2 years.
This has created a whole new paradigm – that of the disposable campaign. One you could play and complete in its entirety in a limited frame of time. On the up side, it means that I’ve been able to explore several character concepts in the short life-span of 3e, and see them to fruition. But the campaign that really stirs my spirit is still my old ‘legacy campaign’.
So perhaps the even faster XP model for 4e is to take this to the next level – the less attachment people have to their old campaigns, the easier it is to make the jump to a new edition. The faster people advance, the sooner they have tried the various character options they’re interested in, and so in theory the ground is set for new editions faster.
Having said that, there are certainly flaws in this argument – it will take about the same time for a player to go from 1st to 30th level in 4e, as 1st to 20th in 3e. And certainly there were ‘disposable’ one-shot campaigns before 3e came along (just not on so grand a scale).
But still, it seems there are more of us who want slower XP progression than faster.
Depending on whether we can confirm if a 4E level 30 equal as 3.x level 20...
3x: 20 × 13.3 = 267
4E: 30 × 10 = 300
...then while leveling would be faster/more frequent, the rate of actual power increase would be slightly slower. Thus, it's important to note whether people are using the term "leveling is too fast" when they actually mean "characters increase in power too quickly". I for one would rather see more frequent smaller jumps in power than fewer large leaps.
I just wish I could remember what article, interview or video addressed the power comparison. :-\
While in theory, XP progression will be in the DM’s hands – often the product in our hands will require the 4e prescribed XP advancement. There are ways to mitigate that, but if you want to hand out ½ XP throughout an adventure path, it is going to require a substantial amount of supplemental adventure development to keep the party on track with the required power curve - side treks that (unless deftly handled) could pull focus from the overall story arc.
Personally, I handle this by decreasing the XP per encounter and increasing the ad hoc XP awards for good teamplay and story progress. My current group of players were pretty noob-tastic when we started our current campaign last November. However the knowledge that their characters benefit when they are roleplayed convincingly and come up with clever solutions has actually seen some pretty good growth for them as players. They now actually plan out pretty involved strategies and know how to pair characters up by strengths/weaknesses. When I followed the standard XP methods more closely there was a good bit more selfishness and kick-in-the-door style gameplay.
I also allow the players to recount their characters' signature triumphs at the end of every session. This adds to their sense of accomplishment and instills a sense of "ownership" or pride in the story. It also helps to keep the players focused on what's been taking place since I generally hold off on the ad hoc bonuses until they can successfully recount their daring deeds at the end. (Well unless someone busts out a hidden box of Thin Mints — that calls for a spot award. ;D
|
|
Thus, it's important to note whether people are using the term "leveling is too fast" when they actually mean "characters increase in power too quickly". I for one would rather see more frequent smaller jumps in power than fewer large leaps.
I think this is a fair distinction you are making. Put me down for 'characters increase in power too quickly' in 3e.
Depending on whether we can confirm if a 4E level 30 equal as 3.x level 20...
3x: 20 × 13.3 = 267
4E: 30 × 10 = 300...then while leveling would be faster/more frequent, the rate of actual power increase would be slightly slower. .
From what I've seen at EN World, I understand that levels 21 through 30 are epic levels, so I'm assuming that 4e means uberpowerful characters faster.
Having said that, the 3e model is based on 13.3 encounters of the same CR (which are typically not very challenging). Since many encounters are CR+2, that would mean you could easily level in 7 or fewer encounters. If the 10 4e encounters are equivalent to a CR+2 encounter, than relative progression is slower.
Personally, I think Living Greyhawk got the XP progression just about right... It took about 100 adventures (of 3 CR+2 encounters per adventures) to hit the high teens. That would be the equivalent of about 600 encounters of the same CR to reach 15th level, or 20 CR+2 encounters per level.
But then, I like to really work for my levels.
From what I've seen at EN World, I understand that levels 21 through 30 are epic levels, so I'm assuming that 4e means uberpowerful characters faster.
OK, that would seem to confirm what was said in the GenCon video about the core rules now including epic level play.
Having said that, the 3e model is based on 13.3 encounters of the same CR (which are typically not very challenging). Since many encounters are CR+2, that would mean you could easily level in 7 or fewer encounters. If the 10 4e encounters are equivalent to a CR+2 encounter, than relative progression is slower.
Yeah, the strength of what each of those 10 encounters entails (vs. the 3.5 equivalent) will be telling as that may be the only way to evaluate things accurately. I will say though, counting to 10 is easier than counting to 13-1/3. ;) I'm hoping those will be 10 encounters that COUNT rather than 13 than are more like a delay-of-game. (I too would prefer the characters have to work for their "ding!".)
Okay, I looked up what I remembered reading on EN World.
Here is "the scoop:"
Advancement
Chris Perkins on the rate of advancement: power level is increasing (although not by a "startling" amount); 20th level in 4th Edition is a little more powerful than 20th level in 3rd Edition. However, you'll reach 30th level in the same time you used to reach 20th level --
"The way character advancement works now, it takes fewer encounters to gain a level, but it takes roughly the same length of time to reach 30 levels in 4th Edition as it takes to reach 20 levels in 3rd Edition. The rate of level advancement is still being playtested, however, so the jury's still out on whether the final game will work this way.
One of the goals of 4th Edition is to make high-level play as fun, balanced, and manageable as low-level play, and to make high-level characters as easy to create and run as low-level ones. Comparing high-level 4th Edition characters to high-level 3rd Edition characters is not an apples-to-apples comparison because they're built very differently. However, there isn't a startling increase in overall power level from a 20th-level 3rd Edition character to a 20th-level 4th Edition character "
----------------------------------------
Will there still be XP? How will it work? "We still have XP, very similar to now... It's not an exponential power curve anymore. You go up more smoothly."
----------------------------------------
Levelling up geared towards every two or three sessions.
So that is, supposedly, how it is meant to work. 1 level every 2 to 3 sessions, and hit level 30 by the time you would hit level 20 now...
Of course, Heathansson was asking what we wanted...
Okay, I looked up what I remembered reading on EN World.
<snip>
So that is, supposedly, how it is meant to work. 1 level every 2 to 3 sessions, and hit level 30 by the time you would hit level 20 now...
Thanks for the quotage. I see now that it wasn't equating the power of a 4E lvl 30 with a 3x lvl 20 but rather the length of time to advance them. Thanks for clearing up that misunderstanding for me.
Of course, Heathansson was asking what we wanted...
Hmm. Personally I'm all in favor of a flatter, more consistent power curve. That's a lot easier to manage than what we have now.
However, when I said that I was ambivalent about faster or slower leveling, I was thinking in terms of a 12% increase in the rate of power increase, not a 50%+ increase — that seems a bit bit crazy. I suppose with a flatter power curve that a level 30 in 4E won't be what we are accustomed to in 3.x which might mitigate that 50% figure somewhat but...
...if I had to cast a vote, as a DM and as a player I'd prefer the sort of rate-of-increase I'd originally thought we were talking about.
Now a non-cynical argument I can see for a faster default progression is that when designing an adventure, it may be better to err on the side of assuming the characters are too powerful rather than too weak. I say this because it's easier to start giving players more magic items and XP than to start cutting back on the perceived rewards. (I cite trying to correct for Monty Haul in 2nd Edition as an example.)
In addition, if a DM is uncertain as to how quickly they should be advancing a party, with a rather fast/aggressive scheme like this, it seems like it would be pretty hard for a DM to err and advance a party too quickly. (OK so that 2nd reason might have been kinda smart-a$$ed. ;)
But that said, what is a "session" when considering 3-5 sessions? one session for us ussually entails 6-8 hours of gaming every 4 to 8 weeks.
We have been playing the Red Hand of Doom for 11 hours now, and three players have gained a new level, but that's just because they have been writing recaps and been awarded bonus xp. We've only had five encounters so far, but my encounters tend to be on the high scale of EL, just because few intense combats are more fun and less a waste of time than combats they can breeze through.
It doesn't really matter for me. When I run published adventure paths and the likes, I hand out XP as the system instructs me to. When running homebrew campaigns or stringing together separate adventures, I might hand out XPs at a slower rate. I hand out XP so that the characters are at the level I want them to be, and that is something I wil continue to do, no matter the edition.
I would like to see them go slower. I have slowed down my groups progress because they seem to go so fast compared to the sold days. I do not think the players value where they are as much when it comes so fast. It also makes the PCs more expendable and not as special to the player (IMHO).
I would concur. Levelling up seems as easy as buying magic items these days, and both those things should be really, really hard. At least that's the way I used to run my campaigns.
How are you supposed to develop characters, or consistently challenge them appropriately as a DM...
This is where some of the "miscommunication" develops.
It seems everyone has different opinions as to what the game should offer.
Eyebite looks at the DM chair as a "challenger" position. S/he looks to provide depth of challenge every single encounter.
Me, I find that hard to swallow. I have a hard time suspending my disbelief if every encounter is a challenge. And I know, as a character, my character would get mighty tired / suspicious if every combat happened to be "appropriately" challenging.
In those games I really like "speed leveling." I guess it is because I hope to eventually 'win' the arms race and get a combat or two that is a breeze...
But that is my take on it. And I don't expect any one to agree with me.
What D&D really needs is some printed advice for the DM and the players on how to collaborate on what they want from the game.
I know, that seems pretty obvious and unnecessary... But not everyone gets that they have a right to say "I want more combat," or "I want more character development time." And then work from there.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Back in the good old days (AD&D) it took forever to level and you felt you'd earned it. "I levelled!! Drinks on the house!! Strike up the band!!"
I was fifty years old by the time I'd made seventh level, and did we complain? Nosiree, bub! Our gran'pappies would'a smacked us, and that would'a stung like the dickens, on account of our gran'pappies being 15th level and all ...where was I... oh yeah, 'cause in their day, there weren't nothin' but 1st through 3rd level. And to get to second, you had to climb up a hill of dead orc bodies. Uphill! Both ways! ...
(end old coot voice)
My suspicion is that, in AD&D, the presumption was that when players weren't playing role-playing games, they were reading fantasy novels. In a novel, a lot happens and the character doesn't get that much more powerful by the end than he was at the beginning.
Nowadays, the presumption is that when players aren't role-playing, they're playing video games, where the characters level up every 30 minutes.
There's also a lot more variety of character classes these days. I can play a 15- or 20-level campaign with my dwarf warblade, and then turn around and start a fresh campaign with an aasimar warlock, and keep going until I run out of cool class combinations. As opposed to AD&D, where fighters were pretty much generic.
Seriously, I suspect that the days of "legendary" characters, built over years of game play, are past. These days, somebody like Robilar would be advanced to 20th level, and then retired, in about a year and a half.
Break Ereka Eleniak out of that cake fellas [via Temporal Stasis natch], time to partay!!"He was a level 9 monk/level 3 cook/- 12 negative level actor if i recall correctly.
LoL
Monk 9, Expert 3, Flaw : negative ranks of Perform (acting).But hey, it's Ereka Eleniak at her prime ... rawr ...
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
XP strikes me as a non-issue. It's by far the easiest thing to adjust in the game. My preference is to level every 2-3 sessions. Leveling faster than that means you don't get an opportunity to use/enjoy the abilities of your character at that level (which is also why dead levels suck so much). I don't have a problem with slower leveling - the important thing is to have enough options that the extra time at those levels is interesting. Being stuck as a 1st level wizard with only 2 spells per day and being a critical hit away from death is not much fun.
Ultimately, I think a lot of the appeal of slower leveling is because it extends the current sweet spot. If the sweet spot has been extended (as is claimed) leveling speed should be even less of an issue.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
When you notice that it's tied to treasure/rewards, it becomes less of a non-issue. I agree--winging it with level-ups is easy. It's the equipment doleout that can burn your game.
I guess then I'd rather see better tools for adjusting treasure than a particular rate of xp.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Well, what do you want to see? What would be fun?
I don't really have any specifics - if I did, I would house rule them. That being said, I would like for the core rules to supply the tools for adjusting magic level, equipment, and xp. Particularly if 4e is more of a toolbox than a campaign setting. Even if the walmart effect is assumed as part of 4e, I hope they discuss its effects and suggest alternatives for those who want to run their game in a different style.