• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

[D&D Design Discussion] Preserving the "Sweet Spot"

As far as slowing the pace of the game down but still doling out rewards, I have seen "one feat per level" work out successfully (with some restrictions -- DM is looking for something fun and cool, not something that just adds yeat +2 more to the one trick pony you've been raising since it was a colt). I have also seen "hero points" used in a similar manner.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Another thought. Just agree to an aribtrary cap like "when the average level of the party is 10th" and then wave the magical "they all become NPCs" wand and have the players roll up new characters, in another part of the gameworld.

The NPCs might be occasionally known, or not.
 

I asked -- why is 10th level the sweet spot cutoff?
Wulf Ratbane said:
It's a good question, one I'd be happy to answer in detail-- unless the question is rhetorical.

For now I'll just say there are a lot of good reasons (and a lot of d20 design "hints") that point to 10th level, and not just where spellcasters are concerned (though that is a big part of it).
I am interested to hear what these are; i.e., it wasn't just a rhetorical question.

I think that the existence of these 'game breaking' spells at "end game" is appropriate to the style and feel of the game I want to run.

I think that the existence of these spells at "mid game" is not appropriate.
Why not?

Do you want the period from (low level --> mid game) play the same as the period from (mid game --> high level)? Because I will certainly grant you that in baseline D&D, that is not the case.
 



Sounds like you want to keep a healthy chunk of power-upping at each level, but want to eliminate binary effects from impeding story-telling. First level and twentieth aren't that different in that regard:

1st: "Whoops, greataxe." This is when hit points don't count for much, and saving throw modifiers are so puny as to make the saving throw mechanic irrelevant. Anyone being hit in the face with a greataxe at level one is probably going to be out of the combat.

20th: "Whoops, Baleful Polymorph/Confuse/Wail of the Banshee." Hit points, while not irrelevant, are so huge at this point that saving throw effects are more useful and game-affecting.

Similarly, with higher levels come other binary effects. Along with "Oh, you're dead" come "Oh, we're there" and "Oh, she's alive again."

Hit points, traveling, and quests to resurrect party members all have something in common - they extend the story in a way that has continuity, for lack of a better word. There's something in between 40 hit points and -10; there's something in between the Keep on the Borderlands and the Mines of Chaos, there's something in between the Paladin falling in battle and his body being carried in the back of a cart pulled by galloping horses to the temple of Pelor while the army of orcs batter down the gates to the city.

But there's nothing between alive and Slay Living, there's nothing between being in Verbobonc and suddenly being in the Inner Fane of Tharizdun, and there's nothing between being dead and then being slapped on the shoulder by the Pope of St. Cuthbert, who coincidentally happens to be your adventuring companion, and whose Asmodeus-concussing just got interrupted by your inconvenient death. ("Dude, you took time away from my buffing!")

During the "sweet spot," hit points are relevant and the loss of them is scary and suspenseful, making saving throws is suspenseful, travelling is a story, and death is something to be feared, but isn't completely insurmountable.

Don't make it take longer to level, just try to make hit points more relevant, saves more relevant, travel more relevant, and death more relevant. Consider nerfing spells such as Confuse (make the chance of acting normally a higher percentage) and Slay Living (maybe it hacks off 50% of the target's HP this round, and the other 50% the next, with a cool-looking purple lightning bolt connecting the caster's hand and the target), assign quests to resurrections ("Bring Us Hextor's Umbrella Rack," intones the Solar assistant to Heironeous, "We Shall Into It Insert An Amusing Device. Upon Completion, We Shall Bring Your Barbarian Back To The Realm Of The Living. Again."), or make it so that Wizards can only teleport once a day and are exhausted after doing so. Maybe Flesh to Stone takes five rounds to finish, with a more debilitating effect each round, and is stopped by the death of the caster.

And I wouldn't make it so that you only get new hit points at fifth level, but new spells at sixth, IMO. That may work for others, but I'd feel cheated as a player myself.
 

Wulf Ratbane said:
...One might say that it can only work if you flatten the power curve-- but, and this is the reason I started this thread-- there is a point where the curve becomes so flat that the incremental cookie falls below the necessary threshold to maintain (Gamist) player interest...

Let's approach this from a different tack. This is one of those "all about Wulf" threads (though your sentiments and mine are very, very similar), so I want to get some info before tackling things more head on.

Think back to 1e for me - where exactly did the level cookies get small enough for you to no longer be interested as a Gamist?
 


Wulf said:
I'm not satisfied with that answer. I am, at heart, a Gamist, I would like to find a Gamist solution that extends infinitely. I am realizing it doesn't exist.

I think those two things are irrevocably at odds. A Gamist, at heart, wants to 'win'. RPG players either have to 'grow' (and I don't mean this pejoratively) out of that mindset, resolve themselves to endless repetition (eg Diablo or WoW), or watch the power curve get so out of hand that the game falls apart (Rifts).
 

Enkhidu said:
Let's approach this from a different tack. This is one of those "all about Wulf" threads (though your sentiments and mine are very, very similar), so I want to get some info before tackling things more head on.

Think back to 1e for me - where exactly did the level cookies get small enough for you to no longer be interested as a Gamist?
I was never really a player in 1e. DM only.

Not that that stopped me from playing "solo" and just rolling up random dungeons, combats, and treasure.

Although, even with players, that was often all there was to it.

In those days I don't think I/we measured success by character advancement, per se, but on how many of the old modules were completed.

So, essentially, the campaign was over when the characters advanced beyond the highest level of any of the dungeons I owned (with the top end being either Queen or Tomb).

I don't really think it's all that useful to benchmark my desires as a player now to what engaged me when I was 10, 12, 16...
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top