Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="triqui" data-source="post: 5878883" data-attributes="member: 57948">But if the Hydra says bite +8, and then the  player can survive those 12 attacks becouse his AC (or hp) is high enough, then he would survive 12 soldiers with +8 attack too. You want him to (be able to) die when 12 bolts are shot against him. That make 12 manticore spikes equally dangerous. If the system allow him to survive 12 manticore spikes with +8 attack, he will survive 12 crossbow bolts with +8 attack, and will laugh 12 crossbow bolts with +3 attack (which is what a low level militia will have) What I'm trying to explain, is that the very assumption of *LEVEL* works like that. If you want a game where the players can be developed for several sessions of gaming, while still being in the same range, you should go with a leveless game system. In runequest you grow and develope your character, but your HP remain stable. In a system with levels, it works different. The very base assumption of leveling is going from fighting (and being able to survive to) goblins to fighting (and being able to survive to) Balors and ancient wyrms. If your game goes with the assumption that characters grow in power to the point they became the equivalent of dragons, then they are no longer threatened by peasants, because dragons aren't.Could a fantasy leveless system be conceived? Yes. But, as far as Mike Mearls have said, it would not be D&D. Mearls has stated that levels is one of those things that make D&D to be D&D (and I agree with him). "leveling up" is the basic premise of D&D. Growing in power until you are able to take down Dragons, is the very base foundation of the game. If you are able to take down Dragons, you will take down 12 peasants.What you are asking for, is the removal of the effect of levels. I suggest E6.</blockquote>

Verification