D&D General "For 4 to 6 characters of 6th to 9th level" - Notes on the intro to a Dungeon adventure

[Paul Farquhar]

Honestly, Dragonlance is a very mixed bag for me. It was still extremely classical in design. The illustrations were fantastic, but the novels were really not that good, and honestly, the module design was really bad. The first dungeon is full of uninteresting encounters that repeat themselves and the fight against the dragon is totally stupid at that level.

The point is, it assumes the protagonists are motivated by heroism, not purely financial gain.

 

[aco175]

As someone who got an adventure published in Dungeon, the level range was common, but it was a guess (based on experience). You didn't calculate a budget of any sort for the adventure, it was purely by feel.

Just thumbed through the adventure, it looks quite good- congratulations. It is also long for typical Dungeon adventures by the looks of it. I can see where the guessing about level is from. I kind of base this on my home group and see where other groups are more or less optimal or equipped with magic.

 

[el-remmen]

Just thumbed through the adventure, it looks quite good- congratulations. It is also long for typical Dungeon adventures by the looks of it. I can see where the guessing about level is from. I kind of base this on my home group and see where other groups are more or less optimal or equipped with magic.

Did I miss something? How did you know which it was? Maybe it is just because I don't know Stormonu's government name.

 

[aco175]

Did I miss something? How did you know which it was? Maybe it is just because I don't know Stormonu's government name.

I just googled the name of the adventure and Dungeon Magazine. This link brought up a copy of the magazine, but I'm note sure how legal it is.

 

[el-remmen]

I just googled the name of the adventure and Dungeon Magazine.

OH! I did miss something, that "The Winter Tapestry" was the name of the adventure. Got it!

 

[pemerton]

Older editions had different advancement tables for each class. A party could have a thief reaching 9th level and the mage is just hitting 6th as an example.

In AD&D, a MU reaches 6th level at 40,001 XP; 42,501 XP will get a Thief to 7th level.

A Thief needs 110,001 XP to get to 9th level; a MU needs 90,001 to get to 8th level and 135,001 to get to 9th.

So if a part of PCs has a 9th level Thief and a 6th level MU that has nothing to do with differential XP tables.

 

[pemerton]

There was also the additional point of how do you calculate the level of a multi-classed character? If you are a 6th Fighter/7th/MU/8th Thief (which is entirely possible dividing your xp three ways because the xp tables in older D&D were wonky as all get out), what level character is that? IIRC, you counted the highest level first, and then half for each other class, but, it's been a really long time.

There's no consistent convention on this.

But also, in the spirit of accuracy about XP tables, a 7th level fighter and 8th level thief are both 70,001 XP; a 7th level MU is 60,001. So your character will be 7/7/8 unless there is some other differentiating effect (eg an attribute-derived XP bonus for the thief but not the fighter; or for some reason the XP have not been allocated equally across all three classes).

Note the oddity of these two paragraphs combined: a 210,000 XP character will be 8th to 10th level depending on class, whereas the "lowest level plus half other levels" method rates the multi-class character at 15th. Ridiculous!

 

[Hussar]

There's no consistent convention on this.

But also, in the spirit of accuracy about XP tables, a 7th level fighter and 8th level thief are both 70,001 XP; a 7th level MU is 60,001. So your character will be 7/7/8 unless there is some other differentiating effect (eg an attribute-derived XP bonus for the thief but not the fighter; or for some reason the XP have not been allocated equally across all three classes).

Note the oddity of these two paragraphs combined: a 210,000 XP character will be 8th to 10th level depending on class, whereas the "lowest level plus half other levels" method rates the multi-class character at 15th. Ridiculous!

Why is it that people need to be technically correct?

My character could also have 115000 xp/class, which would make the character a 7th Fighter/8th MU/9 Thief.

The point is, that multiclass characters would likely be various levels simply because of the way the xp table worked. The exact numbers really aren't this issue. And, yes, calculating the value of a multiclass character gets really, really wonky.

 

[aco175]

Why is it that people need to be technically correct?

I was debating if I wanted to respond. I thought that when I wrote "as an example" it was understood.

 

[Voadam]

For me the level range always seemed to be the suggested starting one, so for this Dungeon one of 6th-9th a party of 9th level characters should be reasonable going in.

Then with megamodules like T1-4 Temple of Elemental Evil the cover says for levels 1-8 but it is really for 1st level parties and takes them to level 8. 8th level characters should not be taking on the beginning of the megamodule.

When for planning purposes I started making my own list of the modules I owned and what levels they were designed for, this discrepancy in intended level range information became apparent.

This latter style seemed to be more and more common over time, so for instance all of Pathfinder's Adventure Path modules the intro will generally say for levels 1-4 but they are for 1st level parties and will advance them over the course of the adventure to level 4 with level appropriate encounters laid out in expected order of encountering them. Most of the WotC hardcover 5e modules are big megamodules that are similar, designed for a specific starting level and going up to a targeted level for the climax by design.

1e accommodated a bunch of level discrepancy so a party might very well have 6th and 9th level characters in the same party just from class xp discrepancy, a culture of characters being used in different games and earning different amounts of xp, multiclassing, xp bonuses from stats, PCs starting from level 1 at different times, energy drain, and magic items that can grant levels. In 2e individual xp awards based on class or individual actions could vary widely.

With 3e the discrepancy in expected character level in a party was significantly reduced with every class having the same xp chart, xp generally being based on the party overcoming challenges, and classes being designed to be combat balanced at equal levels unlike in prior editions. Xp discrepancy and level discrepancy could be there from item creation, favored racial class mechanics, energy drain, and level adjustment races, but these were significantly less than prior editions and the xp discrepancy mechanics were eventually phased out as the editions continued on.

At various points in the post AD&D editions the CR math was also designed to be tighter to a specified level of challenge and so it is arguable the game became less forgiving of level discrepancies in the party. The tying of xp to encounter challenge and a single xp chart also made it easier to design challenges of a targeted toughness to a specific expected level in a module. Both of these factors would make the design of a module for a single specified level more functional and favored the latter style of level range designation.