D&D 5E Earning Levels In Game? (+)

[doctorbadwolf]

Sunday public safety announcement (PSA). Please write out the acronyms in the opening post (OP) so everyone knows what you are talking about.

I can see some sort of video game advancement and how it might work, but it seems that all the advancement would be on the DM to control. It might also need a highly detailed setting to place all the advancement points, especially if they are going to be in dungeons.

Nah it can be a player facing mechanic that the DM participates in, in a conversation. Basically the idea is that the player says “I am going to research a place or person to learn XYZ from”, and from there a system moves forward with player and DM inputs.

Yeah, then it's a non-starter for me if you've got to quest for the fun parts of your class and they're not considered integral.

What's even the point of leveling if it doesn't get you anything?

This comes across like you’re not trying to understand the premise, but rather to just come in and crap on it.

In case that isn’t intentional, the point of leveling is to pace power progression, help the dm build challenges, and provide any “automatics” like more spell power or other basic scaling stuff. And to level gate some abilities, of course.

As for the first part, that wildly misses the point. Stunning strike isn’t “the fun parts of your class”. Your class is not anything more than starting package and automatic level scaling.

Stunning strike is a move that exists with a level alongside other martial techniques with the light fighting, focus, and kensei, tags. Which means you have to be in medium or light armor or no armor with no heavy weapons, have access to Focus (ki, but also other characters have it), and the Kensei class might be able to learn it by study and training at a safe haven rather than finding a master, but anyone else can only be taught the technique.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

In my rules for playing through level 0, characters assemble the suite of features of a 1st-level character by finding tutors with which to train in downtime or learning on the job. Here's a link to the title on DMsGuild which has a full size preview.

Nice. I will check that out.

I think it might be that D&D needs for only things like spells, feats, martial techniques, etc, to be like the OP.

In my mostly classless system, it’s much easier, but breaking sneak attack into parts so it can be gained like a feat is more work than making up new abilities.

 

[Charlaquin]

Definitely my kind of game.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Removed. + threads aren't for criticism.

 

[Charlaquin]

Like I said, the idea works in my opinion for a game that is focused specifically gaining these capabilities as part of a quest, but doesn't really work if you're trying to do something else because every member of the party is going to be taking lot of time just getting the pieces of their class that was taken to facilitate this concept.

I think it would be a powerful tool for facilitating emergent gameplay. The game isn’t about gaining new capabilities, but those capabilities are always there as a motivator to instigate action. Whatever happens along the way is what the game is “about.”

 

[Hriston]

Nice. I will check that out.

I think it might be that D&D needs for only things like spells, feats, martial techniques, etc, to be like the OP.

In my mostly classless system, it’s much easier, but breaking sneak attack into parts so it can be gained like a feat is more work than making up new abilities.

The way it's broken up in my 0th-level rules is the initial training lets you deal an extra 1d4 damage (with the normal conditions of Sneak Attack) if you succeed on a DC 10 Dex check. After a further period of instruction and/or gaining experience with the ability, you can forgo the check. Finally, the extra damage increases to 1d6 once you complete the final training to become a 1st-level rogue.

 

[Ath-kethin]

I tried it back when we were playing 2e, and again with a different group playing 3.x.

I love the idea, but in my experience it leads to a bunch of time where one character is hauling the rest of the part from place to place for stuff that doesn't involve them at all. Didn't quite work at my table(s).

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It's a pretty cool idea, but it might be challenging to implement in a table top role playing game. In a Zelda game, you've got one protagonist to worry about, but in your typical TTRPG, you've got 4+ players to worry about.

Yeah it would need to be either a pretty quickly resolved mechanic, or push the model more toward learning while doing the normal adventure stuff, ie investigating, researching, engaging with the problem (conflict), and during downtime.

A lot to think about.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

You asked if it sounded fun. I answered you.

Yes, in an aggro manner that comes across as just being here to crap on a +thread.

If you don't want critique, then say so. Don't go on the attack because you don't like the answer.

You might notice that you’re the only person I’ve reacted to this way, of all the people criticizing the idea.

There’s a reason for that.

Says who? Maybe you don't think class abilities are the fun part of the classes, but they're actually the only part of classes except some barely differentiated numbers.

You misunderstand. Specific later level abilities in such an model are not class abilities. That’s the point. Like I already told you, a class would just be a set of starting abilities and at most a table for auto-scaling features.

Like I said, the idea works in my opinion for a game that is focused specifically gaining these capabilities as part of a quest, but doesn't really work if you're trying to do something else because every member of the party is going to be taking lot of time just getting the pieces of their class that was taken to facilitate this concept.

Again, there is no such thing as the bolded text.

I think it would be a powerful tool for facilitating emergent gameplay. The game isn’t about gaining new capabilities, but those capabilities are always there as a motivator to instigate action. Whatever happens along the way is what the game is “about.”

Exactly.

The way it's broken up in my 0th-level rules is the initial training lets you deal an extra 1d4 damage (with the normal conditions of Sneak Attack) if you succeed on a DC 10 Dex check. After a further period of instruction and/or gaining experience with the ability, you can forgo the check. Finally, the extra damage increases to 1d6 once you complete the final training to become a 1st-level rogue.

Makes sense.

I tried it back when we were playing 2e, and again with a different group playing 3.x.

I love the idea, but in my experience it leads to.a bunch of time where one character is hauling the rest of the part from place to place for stuff that doesn't involve them at all. Didn't quite work at my table(s).

Yeah this issue actually makes me wonder if it ought to be done flashback style, where you figure out, taking turns, where you got your new toys. Definitely soemthing to consider.

 

[TwoSix]

There are some NuSR games that facilitate diegetic character growth; Into the Odd and Electric Bastionland, for example.

It's something I've been working on in my own games off and on for the past several years, I think it's definitely an area that hasn't been explored enough in the TTRPG space. And yea, the new Zeldas and Elden Ring are excellent examples of diegetic growth.

For 5e, I've been experimenting with a classless game focused on in-character growth. Every level, each PC gets a "feat"; they can pick from a menu, or the player and I negotiate for a new ability that fits their character arc, usually focused on an ability or item they've acquired in play.