Level Appropriate Challenges, Adventures, world

[Janx]

A variety of threads have had some comments about "level appropriate" challenges and the like.

I've seen folks be a little divided about the concept. Especially in sandbox threads.

I got a hunch that folks who get bent out of shape over the concept aren't looking at the big picture.

First off, let's knock out the extreme ends.

A good GM who has "level variety" in his game world probably doesn't plop a 20th level dragon and its Dungeon of High Level Doom right next door to Newbsville and not provide any warning to the NPCs.

a good GM who presents "level appropriate" challenges in his game doesn't have every NPC and monster be the exact same level as the party. The raw extreme of this would mean that the NPCs would level up with the party all the time. That just defies common sense.

When I write adventure material, I write level appropriate stuff. I prepare monsters and challenges that aren't above a range I think is too high.

That doesn't mean high level stuff doesn't exist. I may allude to high level NPCs or really dangerous stuff over way over there. But I'm not inclined to write up a ton of material above 10th level for a 5th level party.

But on the other hand, if the PCs decide to seek out some big trouble, or start getting out of hand, then higher level stuff can be whipped up. If the PCs decide to head out for the bad Lich over yonder, then they'll encounter increasingly higher CR stuff on the way. If they start committing serious crimes in town, at some point i'll send in some higher level NPCs to take them down (just as the cops send in a SWAY unit).

In a sandbox, it seems to ultimately come down to the party heading to a dungeon. Where each level is pretty much generated by random tables that correspond to PC level. So while the PCs COULD go too deep, there is an inherent sense of level appropriateness in the design.

Last but not least, but I'm pretty sure most adventures TSR published (even the 1e stuff) has some text on the cover that says "for levels X through Y"

 

[the Jester]

In a sandbox, it seems to ultimately come down to the party heading to a dungeon. Where each level is pretty much generated by random tables that correspond to PC level. So while the PCs COULD go too deep, there is an inherent sense of level appropriateness in the design.

I think your definition of sandbox is far removed from the one that many of us who call ourselves sandbox dms use. I am not sure if you mean to sound dismissive here, but that's how you come across to me. Just FYI.

Sandboxes are not all about a dungeon generated by random tables corresponding to the party's level. A sandbox will probably have dungeons in it, but they are probably neither randomly-generated nor always level-appropriate. For instance, the party might start (at 1st level) knowing about the local haunted house, the nearby kobold caves and the ruined keep a few miles away that is ruled over by a tribe of ogres.

None of those need have randomly generated content. What makes it a sandbox is that the party doesn't have to go to any of them, but can choose any of them, regardless of "level appropriateness." A sandbox has no "wrong direction" or "off track" for the campaign, although the pcs can easily get off track in regards to a specific goal.

I'm not entirely certain what the thesis of your post is- "all encounters are level appropriate" maybe? Or "level appropriate encounters are a good thing"?

Bear in mind that not everyone has the same playstyle. My party encountered a dragon about 10 levels above them last session, because they were traveling through its turf. They knew it; they had purchased an appropriate "tribute" (bribe) to buy safe passage. Even so, it could have easily turned to combat. They thoroughly enjoyed the encounter, even though it wasn't level-appropriate. So while I will agree that "level appropriate encounters are a good thing", I won't agree that "all encounters are level appropriate", nor can I buy "only level appropriate encounters are fun."

 

[nedjer]

IMO a RPG sandbox comes across as the antithesis of a series of 'go tos' and random levels. It's working with a pool of flexible resources that you deploy as an open system - comparable to a mesh or a small world network.

Otherwise, kind of like the difference between sitting down to a set menu at school dinners v's a tapas or chinese meal where all the dishes are laid out before you.

Within that players are maybe going to have the option of visiting the Lich or the orcs; and the system will adapt on the fly to accomodate that, e.g. choose to visit the Lich real early -then don't be surprised if it all goes a bit pear-shaped.

 

[nedjer]

School dindins v's player choice - that's a win for player choice

 

[ExploderWizard]

Someone cover The Jester for me. I am unable to give him XP right now.

 

[Rel]

I've found that system of choice has some bearing on this. We're currently playing Savage Worlds and Savage Worlds has no particular "CR system" or anything similar. Instead it says that you should just put in whatever you feel is appropriate as the GM and the players can either handle it or not (which sounds pretty sandboxy to me!). It suggests that the players ought to have in mind that there will be challenges they cannot defeat (yet) and be considering in each battle whether they should retreat to fight another day.

One reason why I think that SW gets away with this concept is that there is less differentiation between a low and a high level character under that system than many others (including all versions of D&D). Also the rules for combat make it possible for the PC's to pretty much "nova" and use all their resources at once to survive a battle that is over their heads. At least they can if they haven't spent those resources already on earlier combats.

It's kind of liberating as a GM to be able to throw in whatever seems right without having to give tremendous though about whether the players can handle it. That's not to say that I toss dragons at them willy nilly or anything like that. But another advantage of SW is that there aren't a ton of stats. I can basically look at a monsters Parry, Toughness and Fighting and know right away whether the PC's stand a chance against it. After that it's a pretty easy call one way or the other.

 

[Janx]

I think your definition of sandbox is far removed from the one that many of us who call ourselves sandbox dms use. I am not sure if you mean to sound dismissive here, but that's how you come across to me. Just FYI.

Sandboxes are not all about a dungeon generated by random tables corresponding to the party's level. A sandbox will probably have dungeons in it, but they are probably neither randomly-generated nor always level-appropriate. For instance, the party might start (at 1st level) knowing about the local haunted house, the nearby kobold caves and the ruined keep a few miles away that is ruled over by a tribe of ogres.

None of those need have randomly generated content. What makes it a sandbox is that the party doesn't have to go to any of them, but can choose any of them, regardless of "level appropriateness." A sandbox has no "wrong direction" or "off track" for the campaign, although the pcs can easily get off track in regards to a specific goal.

I'm not entirely certain what the thesis of your post is- "all encounters are level appropriate" maybe? Or "level appropriate encounters are a good thing"?

Bear in mind that not everyone has the same playstyle. My party encountered a dragon about 10 levels above them last session, because they were traveling through its turf. They knew it; they had purchased an appropriate "tribute" (bribe) to buy safe passage. Even so, it could have easily turned to combat. They thoroughly enjoyed the encounter, even though it wasn't level-appropriate. So while I will agree that "level appropriate encounters are a good thing", I won't agree that "all encounters are level appropriate", nor can I buy "only level appropriate encounters are fun."

You didn't just plop in a high level encounter. You made sure your players had forewarning and thus it was an important part of your game.

As opposed to some hidden danger surprise to screw the party because a high level dragon happens to be hiding behind the hill.

Thats my real point. While I plan a majority of my content to be level appropriate, there's room for high level stuff.

What there's not room is for high level surprises that are really intended to screw players, or a world where everything matches the PC level.

 

[frankthedm]

One of my problems with so called level appropriate encounters is that it means players are earning XP to level up their enemies.

Originally posted by [MENTION=18]Ruin Explorer[/MENTION]
This is actually a serious problem, for me, particularly with 3E. With 1E/2E the "point" was clear. Monsters were largely static, and thus an increase in power meant you could deal with more/tougher monsters. With 3E and everything advancing and so on, it suddenly meant that you could end up taking on types of monster you were "more powerful than" but which had been advanced to the point where they'd caught up, which could feel a little dumb and computer-game-ish (Oh, look it's the Blue Imps, they have 3x as much HP as the Green Imps).

Agreed. I'm earning XP to make myself stronger, not to level up every foe i fight. It's fine and dandy to have leveled humanoids as officers, elites and commanders, but the bulk of their forces should be in low level grunts. Great Cleave should NEVER be allowed to seem weak, which is exactly what tends to happen as the tribe of 1st level orcs fuse together and becomes a squad of barbarian6/warrior2 orcs. [sblock=Here is how many humanoid should be encountered before they start gaining levels]Goblins: Gang (4-9), band (10-100 plus 100% noncombatants plus 1 3rd-level sergeant per 20 adults and 1 leader of 4th-6th level), warband (10-24 with worg mounts), or tribe (40-400 plus 100% noncombatants plus 1 3rd-level sergeant per 20 adults, 1 or 2 lieutenants of 4th or 5th level, 1 leader of 6th-8th level, 10-24 worgs, and 2-4 dire wolves)

Orcs: Gang (2-4), squad (11-20 plus 2 3rd-level sergeants and 1 leader of 3rd-6th level), or band (30-100 plus 150% noncombatants plus 1 3rd-level sergeant per 10 adults, 5 5th-level lieutenants, and 3 7th-level captains)

Bugbears: Solitary, gang (2-4), or band (11-20 plus 150% noncombatants plus 2 2nd-level sergeants and 1 leader of 2nd-5th level)

Gnolls: Solitary, pair, hunting party (2-5 and 1-2 hyenas), band (10-100 plus 50% noncombatants plus 1 3rd-level sergeant per 20 adults and 1 leader of 4th-6th level and 5-8 hyenas), or tribe (20-200 plus 1 3rd-level sergeant per 20 adults, 1 or 2 lieutenants of 4th or 5th level, 1 leader of 6th-8th level, and 7-12 hyenas; underground lairs also have 1-3 trolls)[/sblock]

 

[Reynard]

You didn't just plop in a high level encounter. You made sure your players had forewarning and thus it was an important part of your game.

As opposed to some hidden danger surprise to screw the party because a high level dragon happens to be hiding behind the hill.

Thats my real point. While I plan a majority of my content to be level appropriate, there's room for high level stuff.

What there's not room is for high level surprises that are really intended to screw players, or a world where everything matches the PC level.

But these aren't the only two choices. Take, for example, the Random Encounter Chart, particularly the wilderness one.

A random encounter chart for a mountain wilderness should likely include a red dragon (barring any special setting specific elements that would change the distribution of dragons). It doesn't matter whether the party travelling through the mountain wilderness is 1st level or 20th level -- the chances of encountering the dragon are the same. Similarly, whether or not the PCs tried to find out what they could likely encounter in the mountains and so knew there was the possibility of a red dragon encounter is equally irrelevant.

I think part of the reason "level appropriate" has become such an issue is that the power curve has become so steep. Take a look at your 1E and B/X PHBs versus Monster Manuals. Dragons will certainly stomp 1st level parties (if they aren't asleep in their lairs ) but just a few PC levels starts to make the encounter look survivable. On the other hand, even higher level PCs need to watch out for the relatively weak giant scorpion because one failed save means death, no matter who you are.

This is a feature of older editions that had eroded over time. Even 2E ramped up giants and dragons and other enemies to make them higher level threats. 3E codified it and 4E built the entire game around it. Whether this is good or bad is dependent upon preference, but it is a fundamental shift in assumed play through the editions.

 

[howandwhy99]

In a sandbox, it seems to ultimately come down to the party heading to a dungeon. Where each level is pretty much generated by random tables that correspond to PC level. So while the PCs COULD go too deep, there is an inherent sense of level appropriateness in the design.

This tidbit stood out to me. I do sandbox games in a multiverse as dungeon style. They don't have to go to a dungeon; they aren't getting out of the multiverse. That means everything in an area is more or less appropriate to its level. Within the area the challenge level is generated with a curvilinear distribution, but it's the basic AD&D bell curve stairway. Adding diversity is the fun part.

I don't feel limited in this as it offers player choice with built in level appropriateness. They simply have to traverse through the level to get to higher or lower ones. I'm speaking abstractly of course. It's not just spatial level progression, but the assignment to a level, on more or less granular metrics, for everything in the entire game.


EDIT:

A random encounter chart for a mountain wilderness should likely include a red dragon (barring any special setting specific elements that would change the distribution of dragons). It doesn't matter whether the party travelling through the mountain wilderness is 1st level or 20th level -- the chances of encountering the dragon are the same. Similarly, whether or not the PCs tried to find out what they could likely encounter in the mountains and so knew there was the possibility of a red dragon encounter is equally irrelevant.

Have you ever seen a 1st level party attempt to traverse mountains? Not a mountain pass, which is controlled by allied forces, but climbing, attempting to find food, being slowed, dealing with non-creature environmental threats like hypothermia, dehydration, altitude sickness, and fatigue? It isn't a 1st level challenge, something that becomes readily apparent the first time they try. And then they aren't even in the high ranges yet where those red dragons live. Could they be really lucky, smart, or both? Yeah, but why exactly are they trying to get to the Orcus level of the dungeon at 1st level anyways? They're either really cocky, really stupid, or extraordinary players.

EDIT2: I'm not there to tell them no, but when your resources get really low in a game there should be some bells going off.