If most DMs prefer low-mid levels...why have levels?

[Henry]

I like the option of having a wide spectrum of power level to choose from, simply put. In games like Warhammer or Harn, the lethality is roughly equal no matter how skilled the PCs. But I like the ability to throw wildly different challenges to PCs depending on level.

Like I tell the programmers at work -- even if it's easier for you, DON'T program yourself into a corner. From the start of the job, assume that you're going to be adding features to this program in the future; you may have no clue what the users are going to be asking for in the future, so be sure you can easily change it later. Similarly, don't limit the power levels that gamers will want. There's always that oddball or 50 who want to game with 55th level characters meeting in a bar in the Nine Hells and getting a commission to steal Asmodeus' hemorrhoid cream.

 

[Gundark]

okay....this will be a bit silly for me...........but here goes...........Yarrrrhhhh Henry I see ye took a prestige class yarrrrr....

 

[Tenbones]

Gaining levels is an artifice.

When you level - you're in essence buying a set of abilities with your xp.

D&D3.x does not scale well. No group uses 3.x straight out of the box (and if you do, your GM will have to adjust the output of gear one way or another for balance) and each group has their own house rules to help balance their campaign for maximum impact in that sweet-spot (I agree with levels 5-13).

The scaling issues inherent to D&D are apparent post Level-12. Melee characters will rarely miss a target (which illuminates the broken Armor Class System), assuming you're using only WotC material (which I find to be uninspired on average) your caster-fanboys usually wipe the floor with most reasonable encounters. CR -system? Useless. Feats - great idea, poor implementation. Everyone gets pigeonholed into one-trick pony status.

So back to the original question - Why have levels?

It's a good question, really. 2ed was HORRIBLY broken - far worse than 3.x, but that was partly due to being overgrown and overdeveloped. It FORCED players and GM's to customize their game from the truckload of content out there. The systemization of 2ed was barely there. However, when the Options and Powers books came out, something interesting happened - something that could with a lot of work be applied to 3e.

Turning all class specific abilities into point-bought abilities that you purchase upon "leveling", you could, actually, have the versatility of creating the type of character you want (possibly doing away with Prestige classes since everyone is customized within the boundaries of what the GM allows). 3.x Options and Powers? 4e? Who knows. Interesting idea. I think d20 can be pushed a lot further than the current flatland systemic idiosyncracies that cause games to fracture post 13th level anyhow. WotC quality is slowly getting better, and more dynamic... SLOWLY (I credit Mearls on this. He GETS IT). I still can't help but feel their flavor of d20 is bland compared to some of the other companies in the field - Green Ronin and AEG for that matter.

I'm definitely looking forward to 4e. Bring it on.

 

[Christoph the Magus]

I think that many DMs (myself included), prefer low to mid level gaming because of the relative ease of prep. For a party that is level 1-10, it's pretty easy to have a handle on what they can do and what they can handle. After that it becomes tougher, with more prep needed, and more spells (on both the player and GM side) that can drastically alter the course of a combat.

As a player, however, enjoyment seems to increase as the levels go up and PCs begin to look more and more like the heroes that were imagined when the stats were rolled up. They can do more things (feats, spells, etc) and challange greater opponents. A wide variety of options begin to open up that make the game more fun.

It's too bad that as the player's enjoyment increases, the DMs enjoyment decreases (for me at least). The highest level 3E campaign that I've run has stopped at level 14-15, and I think that the players were dissapointed that we didn't continue. But planning the game had become so burdensome that I just wanted to start over.

 

[Doug McCrae]

If most DMs prefer lower power adventures then......why bother having levels to begin with?

Your question doesn't make sense. Just because a particular range of power might be preferred is no reason to use, or not to use, levels for advancement. You could have the equivalent of the 1st to 20th power progression without actually using levels if you wanted. For example HERO characters built on 0 points and gaining 25 points a session. Likewise there is no reason why a D&D game that starts at 1st and ends at 10th should not use levels (or even one that goes from 5th to 8th).

The level system exists for psychological reasons related to the addictiveness of the D&D model, used with great success in video games. For some reason we prefer our power gains to come in plateaus rather than incrementally. Maybe it's the thrill of anticipation, getting nothing for a while, then a big jump. I don't know, but I believe studies have shown it to be more pleasing.

 

[Gold Roger]

D&D3.x does not scale well. No group uses 3.x straight out of the box (and if you do, your GM will have to adjust the output of gear one way or another for balance) and each group has their own house rules to help balance their campaign for maximum impact in that sweet-spot (I agree with levels 5-13).

The scaling issues inherent to D&D are apparent post Level-12. Melee characters will rarely miss a target (which illuminates the broken Armor Class System), assuming you're using only WotC material (which I find to be uninspired on average) your caster-fanboys usually wipe the floor with most reasonable encounters. CR -system? Useless. Feats - great idea, poor implementation. Everyone gets pigeonholed into one-trick pony status.

Speak for yourself. We are using D&D out of the box, without house rules (ok, one house rule- only one quarter xp, but that isn't because of any of the reasons you stated). And I don't have to adjust the output of gear for balance.

Our group has no sweet spot, doesn't need any extra work to balance the game and I make good use of CR and and have no problem creating encounters that hold up under preasure.

Further I've seen examples of higher level out of the box games that worked well enough in storyhours on these boards.

If your experiences vary, that's fine, but as I've said- speak for yourself and don't just assume things about others.

 

[Umbran]

No group uses 3.x straight out of the box

You would probably do well to not speak for the populace at large. There are likely some million or more D&D players out there, and to claim you know that nobody does other than as you say is a touch hubristic.

Not to mention, it is likely to cheese folks off, and start arguments. Feel free to speak for yourself, and for your observed experience, but don't expect anyone to accept that you know what every single D&D player does or does not do.

 

[Hussar]

Gaining levels is an artifice.

When you level - you're in essence buying a set of abilities with your xp.

A good point. Very true.

D&D3.x does not scale well. No group uses 3.x straight out of the box (and if you do, your GM will have to adjust the output of gear one way or another for balance) and each group has their own house rules to help balance their campaign for maximum impact in that sweet-spot (I agree with levels 5-13).

I use the game pretty much out of the box. Very few house rules - only one comes to mind, no web spells. My parties are almost dead on wealth by level tables.

The scaling issues inherent to D&D are apparent post Level-12. Melee characters will rarely miss a target (which illuminates the broken Armor Class System), assuming you're using only WotC material (which I find to be uninspired on average) your caster-fanboys usually wipe the floor with most reasonable encounters. CR -system? Useless. Feats - great idea, poor implementation. Everyone gets pigeonholed into one-trick pony status.

One trick pony status? What game do you play? I've yet to see a single build that has come to dominate the game. Heck, I've yet to see several builds that have come to dominate play. There is a huge variety in the mechanical aspects of characters.

Yes, the FIRST attack from high level fighter types will hit. But, the second is iffy and the third is very iffy. I can accept that double digit fighters will hit at least once per round. As far as the casters go, well, if your casters are wiping the floor with encounters, I posit that you need to brush up on your DM'ing fu a touch.

I have also found CR to be invaluable when calculating encounters. I recently ran a gauntlet style set up with four straight encounters with no rest between them. Without CR, I would have been forced to use my best guess for what would work. With CR, I crafted 4 encounters, 2 at EL-1, 1 at par and one at EL+2 and it worked beautifully. One of the best set battles I've ever done.

So back to the original question - Why have levels?

It's a good question, really. 2ed was HORRIBLY broken - far worse than 3.x, but that was partly due to being overgrown and overdeveloped. It FORCED players and GM's to customize their game from the truckload of content out there. The systemization of 2ed was barely there. However, when the Options and Powers books came out, something interesting happened - something that could with a lot of work be applied to 3e.

Turning all class specific abilities into point-bought abilities that you purchase upon "leveling", you could, actually, have the versatility of creating the type of character you want (possibly doing away with Prestige classes since everyone is customized within the boundaries of what the GM allows). 3.x Options and Powers? 4e? Who knows. Interesting idea.

I believe Hero does this, although I am unsure. IME, point buy systems result in cookie cutter characters where everyone takes the exact same advantages because those advantages are best. Palladium games were particularly guilty of this. Vampire as well.

I think d20 can be pushed a lot further than the current flatland systemic idiosyncracies that cause games to fracture post 13th level anyhow. WotC quality is slowly getting better, and more dynamic... SLOWLY (I credit Mearls on this. He GETS IT). I still can't help but feel their flavor of d20 is bland compared to some of the other companies in the field - Green Ronin and AEG for that matter.

I'm definitely looking forward to 4e. Bring it on.

Two things here. Flatland systemic idiosyncracies? I'm not entirely sure what that means, but, having played more than a few games past 13th, I'm going to tell you that it is by no means a sure thing that the game implodes at high levels. It requires more work from the DM, true and certainly requires the DM to stop relying on standard fallback adventures since the players can get around most of the problems with ease.

Secondly, considering AEG failed in the d20 business and is no longer publishing things d20, I'm not really sure how great an idea it would be for WOTC to emulate them. Isn't GR moving pretty far away as well? At least far from d20 D&D. As far as quality goes, I would hardly put AEG up on the block. Any company that prints books with ores instead of orcs isn't exactly the poster boy for quality.

 

[Herobizkit]

I've been DMing a different campaign for a little over 2 years. They're at level 10-12. But there's been lots of death. I doubt we'll get to level 20. Hell, I'm just hoping we actually finish RTTTOEE.

Yarr harr haar! I have my RttToEE war wounds, and I finished the module with 2 PCs and 3 NPCs at an average level of 16th with 3 character deaths and 1 NPC death. I feel your pain... I don't think these character will see 20th level either but D-A-M-N what a time!

 

[Herobizkit]

I'm guilty of always wanting to multiclass, so I never really see any super-high level character levels in one class. Of all of the core classes, I believe only the monk gets something new and interesting by way of character abilities at EVERY level, while others only 'tweak' every second or third.

For those who dislike levels, maybe if you tried "forcing" level limits like in d20 Modern, requiring players to multiclass in ocer to advance.

2ed was definitely b0rken, but only if you knew how to b0rke it. Skills and Powers was the best book available, and the kit books were fine too. A combo of both would be what I'd be looking for in a character creation venture.