Brother Shatterstone
Dark Moderator of PbP
Mokona said:
Other, I think something don’t work well at high levels…. Like level adjustments in your quoted example but for the most part it works well enough.
Character Equality
- Thread starter Mokona
- Start date
Other, I think something don’t work well at high levels…. Like level adjustments in your quoted example but for the most part it works well enough.
Kelleris said:
Interesting point, and I agree that D&D has always been like this - the high level character who can defeat whole armies singlehandedly. That's one of the things that most bothers me about D&D, so I'd prefer the system handled power progression differently - but then again, would it be D&D then? Probably not.
Psion
Adventurer
I could do without shifting down the power curve. I mean, I wouldn't mind playing a game like that, but don't think D&D should be it. I have played games that progressed like that, and really, WHFRP sort of fits this mold... every advance is a single small step increase. And you will never be (for examlple) a great wizard in the scope of a game.
Some game experiences are fine for that, but it's not what I want out of D&D.
Some game experiences are fine for that, but it's not what I want out of D&D.
Ringmereth
First Post
Andre said:
Fantasy is full of that sort of thing: the intro to Fellowship of the Ring showed Sauron taking on most of an army singlehandedly, RA Salvatore's writing has plenty of instances of Drizzt taking on dozens or hundreds of orcs at once, and powerful mages of almost any fantasy fiction have the capablilty to burn, fry, freeze, or flat-out kill your average soldier without much effort. By the time a D&D character in a high fantasy world has hit 20th level, he (or she) should be a literal army of one, and capable of swatting aside conscripts like flies. If you prefer a more realistic approach, you don't want pure D&D. Variants like WP/VP and d20 Modern's Massive Damage threshold help out in these cases, but other systems are better suited to heroes who are a bit more human.
FireLance
Legend
I think there are two different issues here. First is linearity, which I would define as the idea that the increase in power that a PC gains at each level is approximately equal. The second is inter-class balance, which I would define as the idea that PCs of a given character level (or ECL, for PCs with a level adjustment) are approximately equal in power regardless of the combination of classes they possess.
Linearity is one way to achieve inter-class balance, but it is theoretically possible to have inter-class balance without linearity. As several posters have commented, D&D is currently not linear. Nonetheless, D&D tries to achieve inter-class balance, but has not been entirely successful.
For example, some people (including myself) think that multi-classed spellcasters tend to be less powerful than pure-classed characters, or characters that multiclass between non-spellcasting classes. One way to adjust for this is to have a Magic Rating (MR) that determines spellcaster level, which stacks with the MR from other spellcasting classes, and which increases even with levels in non-spellcasting classes (similar to how BAB, saving throws, hit points, skill points, etc. stack even if they come from different classes). The next logical setp is to have a unified spells per day table, where the number and level of spell slots gained by a spellcaster depends on his MR, so that a Clr20, a Wiz20 and a Clr10/Wiz10 have access to the same number and level of spell slots (barring class abilities such as a cleric's domain spells, or a sorcerer's extra spell slots, say). A Clr10/Wiz10 will thus have access to less powerful spells (up to 5th level), but is able to use his higher-level slots to enhance them with metamagic feats (Empower, Maximize, Quicken), and can cast them at the same caster level as his single-classed counterparts. This will make him more equal (perhaps) to other 20th-level characters. I believe Gez has fleshed out a system along that does this.
As for the problem with level adjustment, one way I can think of to "fix" the system is for powerful races to grant level-based advantages as well. For example, the half-celestial template grants additional and more powerful spell-like abilities as the base character gains levels. Similarly, the half-dragon template could base the natural armor bonus and breath weapon damage on the base creature's hit dice instead of a flat number, and provide an extra ability score increase, perhaps increasing Strength by 1 point every 4 levels. I recognize it would be a massive effort to define level-based advantages for every powerful race, though.
Linearity is one way to achieve inter-class balance, but it is theoretically possible to have inter-class balance without linearity. As several posters have commented, D&D is currently not linear. Nonetheless, D&D tries to achieve inter-class balance, but has not been entirely successful.
For example, some people (including myself) think that multi-classed spellcasters tend to be less powerful than pure-classed characters, or characters that multiclass between non-spellcasting classes. One way to adjust for this is to have a Magic Rating (MR) that determines spellcaster level, which stacks with the MR from other spellcasting classes, and which increases even with levels in non-spellcasting classes (similar to how BAB, saving throws, hit points, skill points, etc. stack even if they come from different classes). The next logical setp is to have a unified spells per day table, where the number and level of spell slots gained by a spellcaster depends on his MR, so that a Clr20, a Wiz20 and a Clr10/Wiz10 have access to the same number and level of spell slots (barring class abilities such as a cleric's domain spells, or a sorcerer's extra spell slots, say). A Clr10/Wiz10 will thus have access to less powerful spells (up to 5th level), but is able to use his higher-level slots to enhance them with metamagic feats (Empower, Maximize, Quicken), and can cast them at the same caster level as his single-classed counterparts. This will make him more equal (perhaps) to other 20th-level characters. I believe Gez has fleshed out a system along that does this.
As for the problem with level adjustment, one way I can think of to "fix" the system is for powerful races to grant level-based advantages as well. For example, the half-celestial template grants additional and more powerful spell-like abilities as the base character gains levels. Similarly, the half-dragon template could base the natural armor bonus and breath weapon damage on the base creature's hit dice instead of a flat number, and provide an extra ability score increase, perhaps increasing Strength by 1 point every 4 levels. I recognize it would be a massive effort to define level-based advantages for every powerful race, though.
Li Shenron
Legend
Bihor said:
That's an interesting take. Note also that when they are NPCs that you fight against, two 10th level characters are considered equal to one 12th level character, since you get the same xp for defeating two CR 10 creatures or one CR 12 creature.
MoogleEmpMog
First Post
Two 60 session campaigns (slightly more than a year if weekly, two years if bi-weekly, etc.) - I'd say this is typical, or perhaps a bit short.
In a 100-level linear system, you level every session, gaining roughly 1% of the maximum amount of power available in the system each time. At the end of 60 sessions, you're at about 60% of the maximum - more powerful than the vast majority of people, just barely "Epic" in D&D terms, but still far short of gods and the like (level 100).
That would be my preference. Almost every non-D&D derived console and computer RPG uses this system; it's a proven winner. Most players like to level up, but many don't like high-level play.
In a linear version of D&D, you level every three sessions, gaining roughly 4% of the maximum amount of power available in the systam each time. At the end of 60 sessions, you're at about 60% of the maximum - more powerful than the vast majority of people, just barely "Epic," but still far short of gods and the like (CR 30ish).
I'd like this (much) less, but it would still be better than the current system.
In non-linear D&D, you have a different chart for different classes.
Spellcaster: .5% of the maximum at 1st level, 1% at 2nd, 3% at 3rd, 4% at 4th, 7% at 5th, 9% at 6th, 14% at 7th, 17% at 8th, 25% at 9th, 28% at 10th, 35% at 11th, 40% at 12th, 50% at 13th, 52% at 14th, 60% at 15th, 63% at 16th, 70% at 17th, and an additional 3-4% each level thereafter, hitting 100% somewhere around 26th level.
Fighter: .75% at 1st, 1.5% at 2nd, 3% at 3rd, 5% at 4th, 6% at 5th, 11% at 6th, 12% at 7th, 15% at 8th, 19% at 9th, 21% at 10th, 23% at 11th, 30% at 12th, 32% at 13th, 35% at 14th, 39% at 15th, 47% at 16th, 50% at 17th, 55% at 18th, 58% at 19th, 64% at 20th, and an additional 3-5% each level thereafter, hitting 100% somewhere around 29th level.
One oddity about the present D&D structure is that, for spellcasters at least, it actually increases FASTER at mid-to-high levels than at Epic levels.
In a 100-level linear system, you level every session, gaining roughly 1% of the maximum amount of power available in the system each time. At the end of 60 sessions, you're at about 60% of the maximum - more powerful than the vast majority of people, just barely "Epic" in D&D terms, but still far short of gods and the like (level 100).
That would be my preference. Almost every non-D&D derived console and computer RPG uses this system; it's a proven winner. Most players like to level up, but many don't like high-level play.
In a linear version of D&D, you level every three sessions, gaining roughly 4% of the maximum amount of power available in the systam each time. At the end of 60 sessions, you're at about 60% of the maximum - more powerful than the vast majority of people, just barely "Epic," but still far short of gods and the like (CR 30ish).
I'd like this (much) less, but it would still be better than the current system.
In non-linear D&D, you have a different chart for different classes.
Spellcaster: .5% of the maximum at 1st level, 1% at 2nd, 3% at 3rd, 4% at 4th, 7% at 5th, 9% at 6th, 14% at 7th, 17% at 8th, 25% at 9th, 28% at 10th, 35% at 11th, 40% at 12th, 50% at 13th, 52% at 14th, 60% at 15th, 63% at 16th, 70% at 17th, and an additional 3-4% each level thereafter, hitting 100% somewhere around 26th level.
Fighter: .75% at 1st, 1.5% at 2nd, 3% at 3rd, 5% at 4th, 6% at 5th, 11% at 6th, 12% at 7th, 15% at 8th, 19% at 9th, 21% at 10th, 23% at 11th, 30% at 12th, 32% at 13th, 35% at 14th, 39% at 15th, 47% at 16th, 50% at 17th, 55% at 18th, 58% at 19th, 64% at 20th, and an additional 3-5% each level thereafter, hitting 100% somewhere around 29th level.
One oddity about the present D&D structure is that, for spellcasters at least, it actually increases FASTER at mid-to-high levels than at Epic levels.
Similar Threads
