3e with 1-10 level spread Forked Thread: Changeover Poll

[S'mon]

Forked from: Changeover Poll

Warning: Here comes a thread hijack.

Have you tried this S'mon? That is - have you tried a 1-10 spread? For a time during the transition I considered doing this. As a DM, I'm highly in favor of it. But some of my players voiced significant resistance. The problem, in our group, came down to a "best for the DM" and "best for the Players" and those two views were oft-times conflicting on this issue. And since we're all a bunch of appeasers, I tried to meet them halfway and they tried to meet me halfway and everyone was only halfway happy. :0

I've said it before but I'll say it again. I think there's a "perfect" system out there somewhere that combines the best of 3e with the best of 4e, but I'll be damned if I'm smart enough to figure it out.

WP

Yes, I ran a two-year campaign using the Lost City of Barakus mega-module and a few others, with somewhat reduced XP awards and NPC level spread 1-10; which is already inbuilt into Barakus as written. The PCs finished around 8th-9th level but we could have played up through 10th or maybe 12th, which I think was my official level cap.

IME it worked great, much better than the previous 2-3 year campaign which went up to ca 18th level and was a painful, Wizard-dominated slog for the last 6 levels or so. Even in the 1-10 setting the Wizard dominated after about 7th level, but not to the extent of ruining other people's fun.

Sticking to a 1-10 range raises a few issues, which are fairly minor - eg the Forge Ring feat is 12th level, where do magic rings come from? But you can make FR 6th level without breaking the game. If you play frequently it's best to reduce XP, I find advancement around 1 level per 5 4 hour sessions when playing twice monthly is good; if playing weekly then 6-7 sessions to level might be better.

The GM needs to use discretion; eg:

NPCs: if PCs are limited to 1-10 then NPCs should be too; knowing they can become among the most powerful people in the world can greatly lessen player complaints.

Monsters: Most CR 1-14 monster stats can be used as-is, but you may want to tweak dragons (make them bigger in the young age categories, make CR 14 or so dragons the biggest there are). Higher CR monsters can be reduced in power, eg the weak 3.0 MM CR 16 Balor works much better than the 3.5e steroidal CR 20 monstrosity; save his stats for a unique Demon Lord or such.

Overall, the trick is to make reaching Level 10 just as satisfying as Level 20 in the standard game. "World impact" should be similar, the PCs should be just as butt-kicking, comparatively speaking.

 

[S'mon]

Oh BTW, while I used standard classes and a level 1-10 range in my Lost City of Barakus campaign, my current campaign takes it a step further - I'm using NPC classes and monster stats out of BECMI D&D! So the PCs are fighting Magic-Users not Wizards, Warriors (identical to BECMI Fighters) not Fighters, BECMI 'Clerics', & Thieves not Rogues. This works well and gives a suitably heroic feel. I think for my next campaign I'll go back to using 3e DMG NPCs and MM monsters though, aiming for a more 'low fantasy' feel.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I think you can go to 10-11th level and be ok. 12 seems to be a watershed level (everything goes up), much like 6 (which is where the casters start to take the lead in the power balance, IME). 18 is also such a level, but by then things are too out of hand for it to even matter much anymore.

I also think the ToB classes help make melee fighters still a relevant threat even much later into the arms race, though they'll eventually need some means of fighting the greater blinking wizard, etc...

[sblock]ToB introduces new problems, though. The damage dealing can get obscene, and doesn't require the situational circumstances for other similar feats of math like the mounted charge. In my current gestalt game, whenever the party is in dire straights, instead of hunkering down and taking more defensive options, they just desperately ramp up the offense as much as they can in one giant burst, hoping it kills off the enemies. No amount of resource draining (current dungeon they even ran through all their healing supplies it's gone on for so long) can get them out of this habit, because 3/4 of them have refreshable, and thus unlimited, uses of maneuvers. It's really starting to annoy me, they'd rather martyr themselves in a blaze of glory than just be more defensive and win with attrition. Ah well, how did this turn into a rant?[/sblock]

The biggest possible issue with going to the double digits (as opposed to say...level 6,like E6 does) is that scrying and teleporting become available. That said, "Scry-Buff-Teleport" has, as of yet, remained strictly a messageboard phenomenon and hasn't happened in my games.

 

[Wisdom Penalty]

Well, first of all - the problem with high level play stems from high level spells, correct? That's my thought, anyway. So you could do a 1-10 spread that S'mon suggests (which is a very good idea), or you could perhaps limit just the spell levels (or even hand-picked high level spells that are game killers). How do you do the latter, however, without unfairly weakening the spellcasters?

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Well, first of all - the problem with high level play stems from high level spells, correct? That's my thought, anyway. So you could do a 1-10 spread that S'mon suggests (which is a very good idea), or you could perhaps limit just the spell levels (or even hand-picked high level spells that are game killers). How do you do the latter, however, without unfairly weakening the spellcasters?

Certainly, higher level spells that just increase the magnitude of what you can do with lower level spells aren't a problem (Delayed Blast Fireball vs. Fireball, for example).

What high level spells are game killers?

(My own feelings on Divination, Teleport, Raise Dead and their ilk are amply documented.)

 

[Darrin Drader]

The next campaign I run will probably have a 1 - 15 spread using the 2X XP advancement. I think 1 - 10 works well, but I think the system can still be pushed another 5 levels.

 

[Wisdom Penalty]

What high level spells are game killers?

Scry, Teleport, Divinations (Find the Path, Contact Other Plane, etc.), even Fly. Those spells that grant skill bonuses and trump non-spellcasting class roles (see Familiar and how it's a better scout than 20th level Rogue).

Note some of the aforementioned spells are not unbalancing, per se, but inject a significant amount of asspain into the game. When your party is starting every day with Heroes' Feast, lathers with 14 buffs before a combat, goes invisible with the power of flight, and then commences combat...it's just annoying.

Now, now - I'll allow some people like that style of story and game. And for those, I'm sure, the 3e spell system works just fine.

I'm not one, and the preponderance and super-utility of magic was one of the main things that finally caused me to close up my 3e shop after 8 years.

WP

 

[S'mon]

Well, first of all - the problem with high level play stems from high level spells, correct? That's my thought, anyway. So you could do a 1-10 spread that S'mon suggests (which is a very good idea), or you could perhaps limit just the spell levels (or even hand-picked high level spells that are game killers). How do you do the latter, however, without unfairly weakening the spellcasters?

I experimented with capping spells at 6th level, but I haven't found a way to keep spells to 5th or 6th level across a 20 level game that (a) keeps spellcaster players happy and (b) lets me use published modules as-written. Keeping to 10th level or so keeps the existing game balance and saves a lot of trouble.

 

[el-remmen]

I have never run a campaign past 12th - that is sufficiently epic to me.

Are there NPCs that are 13th, 14th, 20th, 24th, etc level? Sure! But they are legendary heroes or reclusive mysterious wizards, etc. . .

I do the old BECMI trick of having NPCs listed of very high level that the PCs are just never meant to fight, and are never meant to be too directly involved - just like in those old modules (for example) that would come out, let's say, before the Companion set, but listed them as a 20+ level character (X2 - Castle Amber was a good example of this)

Where do magic rings or other powerful items come from? Well, either from the afore-mentioned NPCs, or from some "ancient time" when magic was more prevalent.

 

[S'mon]

Are there NPCs that are 13th, 14th, 20th, 24th, etc level? Sure! But they are legendary heroes or reclusive mysterious wizards, etc. . .

I do the old BECMI trick of having NPCs listed of very high level that the PCs are just never meant to fight, and are never meant to be too directly involved

What's the advantage of this in a campaign where PCs are limited to 10th, do you find? I've found that the fewer high level NPCs I have the better, to the point where now I'm using 'no one over 10th' (Barakus) and even 'no PC class NPCs' (current campaign). I find high level friendly NPCs are always a pain as they become resources for the PCs to call upon with game-breaking spells, while high level hostile NPCs mean dead PCs in 3e.