New Level-less RPG

[ThorinTeague]

I've been monkeying around with some ideas. One thing I'm toying with is what an RPG without levels would look like. I'm trying to see if it's feasable to take the idea of a "level" and sort of divide it up into its constituent components that a player can "buy." Like if you thought of a traditional level as a "package" of advancements, it might (depending on system) come with any of:

Increased Hit points
Better Chance to Hit
More Chances to Attack
Ability Score Increase(s)
New Proficiencies/Skills, or increased expertise in them
New/More/Higher level Spells
New/Better Class Abilities
Etc. Etc... you get the idea.

This would work (or not) from a system of milestones. You hit x milestone, get an xp and you can spend your milestone on any of the aforementioned and probably more. A running XP total should provide an approximate idea of power level for terms of balancing encounters and/or writing adventures.

It may be that some degree of requirement barriers should be baked in to prevent a player from, say, buying into nothing but increased chance to hit at the expense of being a complete glass cannon. Or whatever the case may be. But to some degree, the idea would be that Players should be allowed to make this decision and be a glass cannon if they wish.

The primary detriment that I am seeing right now is that it require long lists of milestones. Probably some would be recurring and some would not. Some would be specific to classes and species. This would probably be several pages of tables. I think in my completely hypothetical system I want negative experiences to advance the character as well, e.g. "failing a quest," "surrendering," "fleeing," "getting robbed," etc. would be on the list along with what you'd expect: defeating enemies, finding treasures, completing quests, etc. etc. so forth.

I open the floor to any thoughts, input, constructive criticism, and/or suggestions you may have.

 

[Reynard]

How experienced are you with different kinds of RPGs? I ask because what you are asking is a methodology that has been around for a long time. If you are new to.RPGs, especially those outside of D&D, I suggest looking at games like GURPS, Savage Worlds, Hero System and anything else that uses incremental advancement.

 

[Blue]

Levels as a mechanism is in the minority for published RPGs, you may want to take a look around. The RPG industry has advanced a great deal over the past several decades and only some of those concepts and ideas are a good fit with the expectations (and sacred cows) of D&D.

There are even level-less Fantasy Heartbreakers. Fantasy Heartbreakers are "It's like D&D - but Better!".

I'd suggest looking around for some other game systems, maybe watch a few games or actual play videos of games that differ greatly from D&D, and see the ideas already out there. Then you can either adopt a game that fits your wants, or you can bring in ideas from all over and make your own.

 

[Eyes of Nine]

I've been monkeying around with some ideas. One thing I'm toying with is what an RPG without levels would look like. I'm trying to see if it's feasable to take the idea of a "level" and sort of divide it up into its constituent components that a player can "buy." Like if you thought of a traditional level as a "package" of advancements, it might (depending on system) come with any of:

Increased Hit points
Better Chance to Hit
More Chances to Attack
Ability Score Increase(s)
New Proficiencies/Skills, or increased expertise in them
New/More/Higher level Spells
New/Better Class Abilities
Etc. Etc... you get the idea.

This would work (or not) from a system of milestones. You hit x milestone, get an xp and you can spend your milestone on any of the aforementioned and probably more. A running XP total should provide an approximate idea of power level for terms of balancing encounters and/or writing adventures.

It may be that some degree of requirement barriers should be baked in to prevent a player from, say, buying into nothing but increased chance to hit at the expense of being a complete glass cannon. Or whatever the case may be. But to some degree, the idea would be that Players should be allowed to make this decision and be a glass cannon if they wish.

The primary detriment that I am seeing right now is that it require long lists of milestones. Probably some would be recurring and some would not. Some would be specific to classes and species. This would probably be several pages of tables. I think in my completely hypothetical system I want negative experiences to advance the character as well, e.g. "failing a quest," "surrendering," "fleeing," "getting robbed," etc. would be on the list along with what you'd expect: defeating enemies, finding treasures, completing quests, etc. etc. so forth.

I open the floor to any thoughts, input, constructive criticism, and/or suggestions you may have.

I was wondering what problem you are trying to solve with this change? Or maybe another question - what benefit to gameplay or to player enjoyment do you feel this change will bring? (and note in my 2nd question, the GM is a player)

I ask in sincerity, as I think it's important to understand if your proposed solution is actually the right one for the issue you are trying to solve for

 

[ThorinTeague]

Gurps I have played, in the very early 90s. I remember next to nothing about it, except that I didn’t care for it. Savage Worlds is one of the systems on the table right now among my group, but I haven’t actually tried it yet. I intend to play an adventure or two of rpg x, then move on to another system.

Other than that I cut my teeth on Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles in 1989 when a friend bought me After the Bomb for my 13th birthday. It was the first rpg book I ever looked at. I had been reading it for a good long while when the epiphany set in that I was reading a supplement to a game that requires a core book. I snagged that ASAP and it was off to the races. We played some TMNT and Heroes Unlimited, then Rifts, for a while before I dove headfirst into AD&D and never looked back.

I would like to hear more of what you have to say about it, if you want to share.

 

[ThorinTeague]

I was wondering what problem you are trying to solve with this change? Or maybe another question - what benefit to gameplay or to player enjoyment do you feel this change will bring? (and note in my 2nd question, the GM is a player)

I ask in sincerity, as I think it's important to understand if your proposed solution is actually the right one for the issue you are trying to solve for

I’m not changing anything, I’m brainstorming ideas for a system that, if implemented, would be built from the ground up. The benefit would be a more direct degree of design control over your character in the context of dialing back on homogenization (all characters can do everything that the game allows any character to do) as well as leaning into a greater [demi/semi]humanity verisimilitude. Were this system written into existence, and if everything went according to plan.

 

[le Redoutable]

you could look at this :
my parallel rules system

 

[GMMichael]

. . . The benefit would be a more direct degree of design control over your character in the context of dialing back on homogenization (all characters can do everything that the game allows any character to do) as well as leaning into a greater [demi/semi]humanity verisimilitude. Were this system written into existence, and if everything went according to plan.

I'll vouch that it works and you should try it out.

As for being level-less, that really depends on how you mean that. If PCs continue to "advance," you're still using levels; they're just flexible. To me, no levels means (mostly) no progression - just change. Which could be cool - maybe a PC has to make initial choices and appreciate or resent them as he/she plays. Or at certain points the PC can change character features to others. For example, up to the change-point, your character was mechanically-focused. But after so many social encounters, your character attains a social-focus instead. Maybe the character concept doesn't change, but it's a new way to think about that character if he/she is now "social."

 

[Bill Zebub]

The One Ring has a level-less system I like.

 

[Reynard]

One of the challenges of level-less, a la carte design is you have to have a very good sense of the relative value of things. It's easy to overlook that and end up in a situation with a huge power swing between 2 PCs that spent the same amount of XP.