Community

 
Jump Menu:
Post Reply
Page 1 of 3  •  1 2 3 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Number of levels in D&D
1 year ago  ::  Jan 16, 2012 - 5:10AM #1
TheRecursionKing
Date Joined: Jan 10, 2012
Posts: 17

The fewer the number of levels there are, the bigger the 'bump' when you reach the next. That is to say, the more you notice because of the power gain. Conversely, it follows that the larger the number of levels there ... the less any one of them really means. Or in other words, the more meaningless they become. For example, the difference felt in play between 4th and 5th level is probably much greater than the difference felt between 101st level and 102nd level.


With this as a reference, what should the level spread in D&D really be?

Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Jan 16, 2012 - 5:15AM #2
Finarvyn
Date Joined: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 382
I'm going to slightly ride the fence on this one.

My initial thought would be to focus on levels 1-10. That's where I play 99% of my games.

However, I realize that players like the feeling of advancement. What I've been tinkering with in my home campaign is creating sub-levels in between existing ones, so that players can advance more regularly but without gaining power so quickly.

Then I re-numbered the levels so that level 20 (for example) would equal the old level 10.

Basically, the number of levels isn't the issue. The problem becomes how quickly the character gains how much power. I run my games with a half-dozen characters playing in one team, and if their power goes up too quickly we find that traditional monsters don't really stand much of a chance so I have to start bulking up the monsters. It's an arms race that I don't particularly enjoy.

So -- short answer is 1-10.
Marv (Finarvyn)
Master of Mutants (MA and GW)
Playtesting D&D Next and liking it!
OD&D player since 1975
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Jan 16, 2012 - 5:26AM #3
Master_Drow
Date Joined: Jun 9, 2005
Posts: 289
I think 1-20 for normal leveling, after that epic levels are a beast of their own.

I find a lot of the meet and greet happens in the 1-10 levels. Meeting kings, traveling places, visiting towns. These are the Necromancer threatening a town style of campaigns. Once the players get past this part they normally reach level 10 or so.
Then comes the second part of overarching plots and arch-villans, this is the 10-20. These are things that use all of, or a large number of, the people and places that the players met in the first 10 levels. Here you get Dragons threatening kingdoms level of campaigns.

Past level 20 you get really crazy adventures. I mean Arch-Devil Lord threatening world level of campaigns. These are fun, but not all people want to play them. That is why I stop at 20.
Im sorry but ADEU is a French word for goodbye, not a combat system.

You say, "Encounter Power" and I stop listening to you.

Have Played/Run Show

D&D 1st ed
D&D 3.5 ed
D&D 4th ed
Shadowrun
Star Wars SAGA
Cyberpunk
Interlock Unlimited
Run.Net


I know my games, don't try to argue about them.

Alignment Explained Show

This is a very simple problem and I will outline it below.
Their are two types of people

Type 1: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "I am lawful good thus I must play lawful good"


Type 2: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "My previous actions have made people and the gods view me as lawful good.


The difference is subtle but it is the source of the misunderstanding. Alignment does not dictate how you play your character. All it does is tell you, the player, how the rest of the world views you, and your previous actions. Any future actions will be judged by their own merits.


Say you're a baby eating pyromaniac. You are most likely chaotic evil. But one day you decide, "Hey all I really need is love." So you get a wife, have a kid, and get a kitten named Mr. Snook'ems. You become a member of the PTA and help build houses for the homeless. You are no longer chaotic evil. And just because you were once chaotic evil it does not mean that you have to stay chaotic evil.


Alignment never dictates what you can do, it only says what you have done.


Now that is cleared up here is a simple test.

What is the alignment of...


A Police officer:

The average Citizen:

A Vigilante:



The answer is simple.
The Police officer is lawful good. He uses the laws of the country and city to arrest people and make them pay their debt to society.


The Citizen is Neutral good. He wants to live is a place that is Good and follows moral and ethical principle, but he sometimes finds the laws impedes him, and he wonders why we spend so much on poor people.


The Vigilante is Chaotic Good. He wants to uphold the morals and ethics of society but finds that the bad guys often slip through the cracks in the law. He takes it upon himself to protect the people from these criminals.


That is the basic breakdown of the good alignment axis. What needs to be remembered is that any one of these people can change alignments, easily.
The Police officer could be bought off by a local gang, and suddenly he drops to lawful neutral.
The average citizen might find that his neighbors dog is annoying, barking at night and keeping him up. So he poisons its food, now he is no longer good, he is stepping towards true neutral. Maybe the citizen really goes crazy also kills the neighbor, hello neutral evil.
It is possible that the Vigilante realizes that the cops are actually doing a pretty good job and decides to become an officer himself, leaving his masked crime fighting days behind him. Now he is Lawful good.


Your alignment is not carved in stone, it is malleable and will change to reflect your actions.
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Jan 16, 2012 - 5:33AM #4
Warder17
Date Joined: Jul 9, 2008
Posts: 85
I say 1-20, epic play should get its own dedicated set of books, as it is epic don't have a lot of support as it is.

Warder 
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Jan 16, 2012 - 5:36AM #5
AbdulAlhazred
Date Joined: Jan 9, 2009
Posts: 10,302
Eh, I liked the 'capped' level sequence of 4e. You have a story to tell with a character, and it goes from a starting point to a finishing point. How long you spend getting there and what you do in the middle is totally open, but you will eventually get there. Basically in all previous editions once you hit level 18 you were effectively done. In most respects the game broke down and stopped being a challenge way before that anyway, but levels past that point were largely meaningless. I could see a "beyond the end of your mortal story" kind of mechanism where you can do some things with "post epic" PCs if you really want to play something similar to Immortals, but I think it would not really have levels (I guess Immortals didn't either, never really played it).

In terms of actual numbers of levels? I think 4e has too many. It leads to a situation where more crunch has to be thrown into the game just to fill up each level with something. I think 18 levels would be fine. At a 4e rate of play that seems to be typically a level every 3 session or so you have an almost 2 year run for a full 1-30 game currently. You could reduce your advancement rate to a level every 5 sessions and stick with that, or just pull the expected campaign length down to a year and stick with the existing rate. I think it would improve the mechanics of the game in a variety of ways (from a 4e perspective) and the step-up from one level to the next is still pretty reasonable.
That is not dead which may eternal lie
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Jan 16, 2012 - 5:45AM #6
Gazra
Date Joined: Jul 11, 2008
Posts: 759
For me, twenty levels hits home. I would like a game with twenty regular levels, then five more for epic. At level 25, the game would proceed in an E6 fashion, in which you only gain new powers/feats/whatever, but no more HP, skill points, etc.

I think 4E's epic problem is that ten more levels were added, while the amount of 'stuff' you get from leveling was simultaneously increased. So now, you end up with epic characters that are a chore to play (and often infuriating to DM for) because you have so many things to remember and so many options for each turn. Regardless of how many levels there are, we need to cut down on analysis paralysis with this next edition.
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Jan 16, 2012 - 5:56AM #7
Tusz
Date Joined: Apr 24, 2004
Posts: 985

Jan 16, 2012 -- 5:33AM, Warder17 wrote:

I say 1-20, epic play should get its own dedicated set of books, as it is epic don't have a lot of support as it is.

Warder 



Popped in here to say this. I'm not necessarily advocating endless Epic levels a la the ELH, but it's a distinctly different style of play that a lot of people don't touch, and should have its own books.

Rhymes with Bruce
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Jan 16, 2012 - 6:21AM #8
Pelletse
Date Joined: Apr 21, 2011
Posts: 229
30 levels!

I used to play 2nd edition and we played so much, we houseruled up to level 30 ( Even level 32 in the end If I remember well... 

In 3rd, I haven't played enough to reach level 10 ( Loved 2nd edition better! )

So having up to level 30 in 4th is just perfect!

Hit Points, SKill Points should continue to boost on late levels but at a certain point ( As "soon" as level 10), instead of gaining new power, you should just switch power or improve the one you got!
I'm playing:
Abin Gadon, Halfling Bard
Winston "Slurphnose", Gnome Sorcerer
Pasiphaé, Minotaur Shaman
Eglerion, Elf Ellyrian Reaver (Ranger)

DMing:
Le Trésor du Fluide (Treasure from the Fluid)
Un Royaume d'une Grande Valeur (A Kingdom of Great Value)
La Légende de Persitaa (Persitaa's Legend)
Une Série de Petites Quêtes... (A serie of short quests)

Playtesting:
Caves of Chaos

We're building the greatest adventure ever known to DnD players!

Also playing Legend of the Five Rings and Warhammer Fantasy.

Sébastien, Beloeil, Qc.
I am Neutral Good and 32 years old.
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Jan 16, 2012 - 6:52AM #9
Tlantl
Date Joined: Feb 10, 2007
Posts: 504
The game should have an unlimited number of levels. Hitpoints should become single point gains after level 10 and there should only be minimal level based increases in power.

The level of the character shouldn't equate to ever increasing character strength, rather a smooth transition from inexperienced to stronger and better equipped to deal with problems.

I believe that gaining levels should be a result of dedication and honest work, the end to a means not the goal.


When I started playing D&D each class had a seperate chart for experience. We had characters with eight or nine levels and others with four or five playing together. I often played three class characters which meant that I was often several levels behind the other players but it didn't matter because that 4/4/5 level character had as much power as the ninth level fighter. That same elf would never reach the same level as the humans did because the rules wouldn't allow it. 

The fighter stopped rolling for hit points at level nine and would only get three a level from then on but he didn't really need any more since the monsters in the game didn't do hundreds of points in damage. They only had a finite number of hit dice and seldom had over150 hit points of their own.

Things stabilized at tenth level but you could gain levels for ever. Only wizards and clerics really got much of anything past elenth level and that was usually a new spell level and another spell slot or two.

I had no problems writing dungeons or over powered characters because I had control of everything the players got in the game. Wizards didn't choose their spells they had to find them as treasure or research them. Clerics had to follow their deities tenents to the letter or risk not getting their spells every day.

When I started running 3e games things stopped working as smoothly as they had before. The lure of ever increasing powers meant that players were more focused on their next level than playing the game. Monty haul was a derisive term used to describe overly generous treasures in the game, but suddenly the rules told me that I had to throw thousands of pieces of gold and ever increasing piles of magic at each player every time they gained a level.

I had to counter every advancement the players made with harder enemies while at the same time having to play through longer and longer fights that yielded little in the way of campaign advancement, treasure, or experience.

I think that the idea that a player should become increasingly more powerful each time they gain a level is the wrong approach. Instead levels should feel like small triumphs in themselves. Nothing special but a little increase in durability a slight decrease in the difficulty of hitting a certain armor class, a slight increase in a thief's chances to succeed a roll to hide or move silently or in the damage he can deal with a sneak attack, or the ability to cast that cool spell your wizard found on that scroll three levels before.

As I see it a character should have everything it is ever going to get the moment he makes up his character. The only thing he should gain at level up is a modest increase in the power he already has. I know this view is going to be unpopular, but for me, it would make my job as a DM that much easier. It would also help bring the fun back into my games for me and the people I play with.
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Jan 16, 2012 - 8:42AM #10
Krusk
Date Joined: Nov 30, 2005
Posts: 4,948

i like the idea of classes being 10 levels long. This gives an implied end of the game, and high tier threats can be level 10. That in mind, maybe dieties are level 26 foes. A similar multiclass system to 3.X would allow PCs to get that high. 


I'd also include advanced classes that anyone can start taking at 5th level that are 5 long. They aren't more powerful, but are much more narrow. Example. I take the class "3.5 ranger" for 5 levels. Then I go into "5e Dragon hunter" for 5 more levels. Ranger can have favored enemy dragon, but its fairly obvious the dragon hunter will be even more focused. 


This means the game implies it ends at level 10ish, but it clearly can go as high as needed. 

5e comments and thoughts all in one place. Check it out to provide feedback, mock, or steal ideas.
http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/28835423/Krusks_5e_Design_Goals?sdb=1
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 3  •  1 2 3 Next
Jump Menu:
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing