Jacob Lewis
Ye Olde GM
I've always believed that the game had too many levels and too many spells. And too many spell levels.
Hmm.. thought I had more to say about that.
Hmm.. thought I had more to say about that.
D&D General How important is leveling to the play experience (lvls 2-8)?
Jack Daniel
dice-universe.blogspot.com
Levels are pretty important. In my experience, you can remove a lot of surprising elements from the game — the d20, the ability scores, character classes, demihumans, magic, hokey medievalism — and D&D will still feel like D&D. Levels are not one of those things.
Though I do think you need at least six of 'em. (Tried four once. Four didn't cut it.)
Though I do think you need at least six of 'em. (Tried four once. Four didn't cut it.)
Sorry I made.you type all that about the randomization. I edited the original post to try to make it clear that it's a slower and more granular skill/ability/power buying with xp (instead of big chunky levels), and not the randomness that I'm pondering. It just so happened.that GW used randomness. The randomness feels like it would be frustrating sometimes, but I have no recollection of it from the early 1980s when I last played it.
Edit: Although others might really like the randomization (see a post a few down from here).
Last edited:
aco175
Legend
I thought that 5e was designed to keep PCs in the 'sweet spot' of levels 3-9.
Some things to think about when discussing with your players. Spells. If you are going to 6th level and you only have access to 3td level spells. Maybe 4th level spells, or 5th, come into play as you 'advance' like you point out. Some players may not like that idea, especially if the fighter gets more stuff than their PC. There is also some players, maybe most players, that like to advance more often that you are saying. You reference gradually gaining more stuff to be roughly gaining a few more levels of power by the end of the campaign. Does this just beg the question of ending campaigns at 10th level? This leaves room for bad guys to have more power and be overcome.
I would rather just double to XP needed to advance over never having a chance to become a hero. I think there is something to higher level play, even though my games to not get past 13-14th level before the players want to start another campaign.
Maybe something with halving the hit points you receive as you advance. You also then need to look as spell damage or weapon/feat damage for martials to see if high level damage would be ok with low HP.
I'm interested in seeing others ideas on this.
Some things to think about when discussing with your players. Spells. If you are going to 6th level and you only have access to 3td level spells. Maybe 4th level spells, or 5th, come into play as you 'advance' like you point out. Some players may not like that idea, especially if the fighter gets more stuff than their PC. There is also some players, maybe most players, that like to advance more often that you are saying. You reference gradually gaining more stuff to be roughly gaining a few more levels of power by the end of the campaign. Does this just beg the question of ending campaigns at 10th level? This leaves room for bad guys to have more power and be overcome.
I would rather just double to XP needed to advance over never having a chance to become a hero. I think there is something to higher level play, even though my games to not get past 13-14th level before the players want to start another campaign.
Maybe something with halving the hit points you receive as you advance. You also then need to look as spell damage or weapon/feat damage for martials to see if high level damage would be ok with low HP.
I'm interested in seeing others ideas on this.
Helldritch
Hero
D&D is pretty much ingrained in the levelling experience. This system is quite rewarding but I will admit that in the evolution of D&D it is less and less so.
Up to 2nd edition, players would get powerful abilities but that power would be restrained through hit point gained after a certain point (usually, but not always, 9th level). This was promoting powerful offensive characters but still vulnerable to a streak of bad play, luck and decision. The heroic portion of the game was at its best in 1ed where a single high level character of any class could take on a powerful dragon and win. It became almost impossible for a fighter to do it in 2nd edition but it was possible for a caster.
3ed became the edition where levelling was both at its best and its worst. The capacity of a high level casters led to the CODZILLA and left the purely martial characters in the dust. Yet, levelling brought a lot of custumizability that made martial characters happy.
4ed followed the same pattern as third but it failed in making people happy with it. It was not a bad edition levelling wise but the pattern was too similar from one class to the other.
5ed level is great, but at high level, the gain in HP becomes a hindrance where monsters barely strike harder and must be literally bloated with HP to compete with players (and they fail at that unless some tweaking of the rules are made) and thus, most campaigns will end around level 14 which is the point where combat becomes a chore instead of a fun thing. Yet, levelling still brings a lot of joy when it happens.
The amount of skills/powers/attributes gained during levelling in D&D is hard to reproduce in a skill increasing system such as Vampire the Masquerade (or other similar systems). The gains that a typical character gains in D&D is quite substantial compared to many other RPGs. In other RPGs you get better at something in which you spend your "xp or whatever" while in D&D you get better at every single choice you made at character's creation! The first approach promotes stronger character at the beginning but slower advancement. The second promotes weaker characters at creation, but a greater power curve as you level.
If anything can be an indicator of what is preferred by the majority of players, just check which RPG, MMORPG, and computer RPG are the most popular...
Up to 2nd edition, players would get powerful abilities but that power would be restrained through hit point gained after a certain point (usually, but not always, 9th level). This was promoting powerful offensive characters but still vulnerable to a streak of bad play, luck and decision. The heroic portion of the game was at its best in 1ed where a single high level character of any class could take on a powerful dragon and win. It became almost impossible for a fighter to do it in 2nd edition but it was possible for a caster.
3ed became the edition where levelling was both at its best and its worst. The capacity of a high level casters led to the CODZILLA and left the purely martial characters in the dust. Yet, levelling brought a lot of custumizability that made martial characters happy.
4ed followed the same pattern as third but it failed in making people happy with it. It was not a bad edition levelling wise but the pattern was too similar from one class to the other.
5ed level is great, but at high level, the gain in HP becomes a hindrance where monsters barely strike harder and must be literally bloated with HP to compete with players (and they fail at that unless some tweaking of the rules are made) and thus, most campaigns will end around level 14 which is the point where combat becomes a chore instead of a fun thing. Yet, levelling still brings a lot of joy when it happens.
The amount of skills/powers/attributes gained during levelling in D&D is hard to reproduce in a skill increasing system such as Vampire the Masquerade (or other similar systems). The gains that a typical character gains in D&D is quite substantial compared to many other RPGs. In other RPGs you get better at something in which you spend your "xp or whatever" while in D&D you get better at every single choice you made at character's creation! The first approach promotes stronger character at the beginning but slower advancement. The second promotes weaker characters at creation, but a greater power curve as you level.
If anything can be an indicator of what is preferred by the majority of players, just check which RPG, MMORPG, and computer RPG are the most popular...
clearstream
(He, Him)
I made
- Ability Scores cap at 18
- Hit Dice cap at 6th
- Proficiency Bonus caps at 6th, except for uses of features between rests
- Spell levels cap at 3rd (fireballs etc, but no polymorph etc) - higher level spell slots are used to cast spells half their level, counting cast at their level for counter and dispel
- Short rests are 1 day, Long are 3. There is a 10 minute "Breather" to spend HD. You recover 1HD per sleep. Long rests don't restore HP.
[One other change! 6. Deck-based ability score generation.]
Part of it for me is trying to picture what that 20th level BBEG is doing while the PCs head that way in level. If they're a spell caster, what can one do with teleportation and dominate person and all of the scrying spells... The concentration and attunement rules in 5e feel like they do a lot to help this. If the powerful bad NPCs and monsters are around without powerful good guys, then I wonder about why there are castles and armies. If there are powerful good guys, then I wonder about why they're sitting around waiting for the PCs. (I guess this is something the comic books deal with. If there is a silver-age Superman around, then your street level heroes are redundant. If it's a less omniscient superfast Thor at the top of the food chain, then there is a lot more for the street levle heroes).
No good answer here. I have a whole list of changes I can picture in a game -- and I should probably make a list and try that RPG. Part of it is familiarity with how everything works I guess and the comfort of knowing the spells and monsters and what dice to roll.
I sometimes think I want grittier. But then I picture the extra dice rolls and the things that wouldn't happen in D&D games I've loved if it was grittier... and I'm not sure... So I'm trying to think about what I can keep in D&D that deals with my world building power-range angst.
I like it, and it feels like it catches a lot of the e6 feel. I'm still mentally stuck a bit in 3.5 (in spite of currently running two 5e games). There the trick is what to do with the feats as they advanced past that... and how to deal with multiclassing to go with the feats... and the fact that they still really advanced quickly compared to the rest of the world... Thinking in terms of 5e, what is the advancement like when they go past 6th level? (Do the attacks keep getting deadlier, while the hp stay the same?).
clearstream
(He, Him)
Roughly, characters jump in power as they complete each tier. Fighters for example go 1x, 2x, 3x, 4x attacks. Additionally, they scale continuously in power due to ASIs, PB and HD.
Features and feats on the whole give breadth. Some high level features are weaker than those lower down. There are some high level features and many spells that bring superheroic and world-warping effects into game. Those mainly start in Tier 3.
Similar Threads
