capping D&D at 5th level?

[Ry]

Even if you just do it to read about how 6th level characters are Epic, I invite you to read the E6 thread:

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=206323

 

[Ry]

Well, I don't fully buy the above, at least for the examples given, in terms of skill checks and DCs. A 5th level character can't realistically make skill or attribute or save checks all that much higher than a 1st level one. The difference is 4 skill ranks, and maybe a feat - still enough to get seriously washed over by the randomness of the d20.

I think of it like this: We go about our lives taking 10 or 20 on EVERYTHING. But when mortal danger is involved, randomness rears its ugly head.

However, setting that aside, yes you can cap the game (and, I presume, slow down XP awards to match). I think the typical problem you'll find is that players like having characters who change and develop over time, and with that cap, they aren't going to change and develop all that much.

Or you could, you know, give them feat-based advancement after 5th (or maybe 6th? That way they're Epic, and 6th level. Hmm... E6?)

 

[Drowbane]

Capping at 5th or 6th just doesn't fly with me. Thats when the game starts. But, its nice to know these variants are out there... just in case I get burnt out on D&D.

 

[Morrus]

The way I see it is this.

The D&D class structure covers adventurers; they gain XP by killing things, etc. They get better at what they do (HP, BAB, spells, saves), and also gain skills.

But adventurers are not the only people with skills. D&D 3E chose to model those poeple with Expert classes and so forth. I don't feel that is the best solution. Rather, a non-classed person (or a 0th level character? 1st level commoner? dunno - makes no real difference, frankly) should be able to gain skill ranks withuot having to gain levels.

In short: Just because adventurers happen to gain skill ranks concurrently with their adventuring levels and fighting ability doesn't mandate that the only way to gain skill ranks is by gaining class levels.

The core rulebooks detail one way to prgress in the world: the way that people playing the game are going to find it interesting to play. Doesn't mean seven billion NPCs aren't practising their not-fun-to-play-as-a-PC professions and gaining skill in them without killing monsters, improving their fighting ability, etc. Consider those rules to be in Core Rulebook IV: Boring Stuff, which WotC didn't wrote because nobody would buy it, and don't worry about.

So Einstein can quite happily have 4 hp, BAB +0 and Knowledge (Physics): 20. The expert gemcutter can quite happily have 3 hp and Craft (Gemcutting): 25.

Hell, I give skill ranks (especially knowledge ranks) to my players for free from time to time.

 

[Rystil Arden]

The way I see it is this.

The D&D class structure covers adventurers; they gain XP by killing things, etc. They get better at what they do (HP, BAB, spells, saves), and also gain skills.

But adventurers are not the only people with skills. D&D 3E chose to model those poeple with Expert classes and so forth. I don't feel that is the best solution. Rather, a non-classed person (or a 0th level character? 1st level commoner? dunno - makes no real difference, frankly) should be able to gain skill ranks withuot having to gain levels.

In short: Just because adventurers happen to gain skill ranks concurrently with their adventuring levels and fighting ability doesn't mandate that the only way to gain skill ranks is by gaining class levels.

The core rulebooks detail one way to prgress in the world: the way that people playing the game are going to find it interesting to play. Doesn't mean seven billion NPCs aren't practising their not-fun-to-play-as-a-PC professions and gaining skill in them without killing monsters, improving their fighting ability, etc. Consider those rules to be in Core Rulebook IV: Boring Stuff, which WotC didn't wrote because nobody would buy it, and don't worry about.

So Einstein can quite happily have 4 hp, BAB +0 and Knowledge (Physics): 20. The expert gemcutter can quite happily have 3 hp and Craft (Gemcutting): 25.

Hell, I give skill ranks (especially knowledge ranks) to my players for free from time to time.

But Einstein is a model adventurer, killing things and taking their stuff. Just look here

 

[Griffith Dragonlake]

Thought provoking article but I just don't buy the argument that 4th or 5th level fighters are a once in a generation event. Weapon Focus at 4th level? The weapon masters that I've met in real life (and lost fights to) are much better than a +7 Attack (BAB +4, +1 Weapon Focus, +2 Str) at 1 attack per six seconds.

I think 10th level is a better comparison rather than 4th or 5th.

 

[pawsplay]

Thought provoking article but I just don't buy the argument that 4th or 5th level fighters are a once in a generation event.

Oh, come on, you don't buy that Spirited Charge makes you the Musashi of mounted combat, or that fireball is a legendary accomplishment?

 

[Warren Okuma]

So what have we learned so far? Almost everyone you have ever met is a 1st level character. The few exceptional people you’ve met are probably 2nd or 3rd level – they’re canny and experienced and can accomplish things that others find difficult or impossible.

I'm above first level, no house cat can kill me! (Hurt me yes, kill never!) In fact everybody is at least fifth level. Proof: Not one human has been killed by going mana a mano with a house cat. That's based upon the house cat scale.

If you know someone who’s 4th level, then you’re privileged to know one of the most talented people around: They’re a professional sports player. Or a brain surgeon. Or a rocket scientist.

No, 4th level are teenagers according to the house cat scale.

If you know someone who’s 5th level, then you have the honor of knowing someone that will probably be written about in history books. Walter Payton. Michael Jordan. Albert Einstein. Isaac Newton. Miyamoto Musashi. William Shakespeare).

No, according to DnD 3.5 Legend Lore spell legendary is 11th. PH Page 246.

So when your D&D character hits 6th level, it means they’re literally superhuman: They are capable of achieving things that no human being has ever been capable of achieving. They have transcended the mortal plane and become a mythic hero.

).

No, legendary is level 11th. 6th level is just competent enough to defeat many housecats.

Given the above, would it not be a simple thing to cap the game (for both PCs and NPCs) at 5th level for a more realistic feel? And if you wanted, you could always slow advancement as much as you wanted (make it twice as slow, or four times as slow, or whatever).

Start at 5th level, yes. Otherwise house cats are still a danger.

 

[rgard]

If I wanted to play a game with a realistic feel, I wouldn't play D&D but GURPS. In fact, I do exactly that from time to time. When I play D&D, I want player characters whose power is intially very low, but which increases drastically over time. No, it's not realistic.

But when I play D&D, I don't care.

Yes, GURPS or LEG's Phoenix Command.

 

[Warren Okuma]

Yes, GURPS or LEG's Phoenix Command.

Clearly you and Jürgen Hubert are above fifth level...