How many levels does D&D need?

[Mercurius]

Reported.

Huh?

As for the topic at hand, I like what Dave the Mage says -- no level limits, but you have to switch classes or "skill sets" -- at least in principle. I would add that power advancement would have to slow waaay down, especially after Paragon, otherwise you'd have absurdly powerful 500-year old elves, liches, etc.

I kind of wish D&D had a more "realistic" curve, so that the power difference in levels decreases the higher you go; of course you could also just slow down advancement to reflect the same developmental trajectory. Even though I like limitless possible advancement, there should be some kind of cap for specific capacities. If you look at skills in the real world, say hitting a baseball, there is a cap on how good an individual hitter can become. Albert Pujols may get incrementally better, or he could just maintain a level of mastery. It could be both: As he ages and his physical skills start eroding, increased mental acuity could keep his overall ability at a similar level, for a time at least. Every player has a different trajectory.

Ultimately it really depends upon the proclivities of the gamers in question, particularly: How important is "leveling up"? How frequently do you like to level up? What degree of power is preferred? Is there a "sweetspot" or a range? Etc.

They key for anyone, I would think, is finding a pace and level scale that is not too slow or little that it bores the players, but isn't too fast that they become jaded. This also relates to the total campaign length and the frequency of sessions. I believe 4E's recommendation of one level every three or four sessions is based upon the assumption that a group plays once per week; if it plays twice a month, advancement might be better every other session (so once a month); if only once a month, maybe a level each session. But again, it depends upon the group.

 

[Steel_Wind]

IMO, levels depend almost entirely on pacing:

How long are you going to be playing that character?

How many sessions? How often are you going to want to level up?

Correctomundo!

 

[pemerton]

Yeah, I agree with the above - you can't talk about a component of a game system independently of its role in the game system. Level has no meaning without the structure of a game around it.

If you divorce the D&D concept of "level" from the mechanics of what happens when you level, you're talking about terms without meaning. IMO, the number of levels D&D needs depends on the edition and on the mechanics, before we can even get into flavor.

The other thing levels (or character improvement more generally) can be for, is to change the relationship between the PC and the gameworld - ie it's not about better characters, but different characters.

4e has elements of this - given the maths, and the encounter-design guidelines in the DMG, the mechanical difficulty of challenges doesn't change much over time. But the PC's location in the gameworld changes quite a bit. Instead of fighting kobolds, you're fighting mind flayers! Instead of being a petty hero, you're realising your epic destiny!

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

I wouldn't put an upper limit on levels, but I like for somewhere around 10th or 12th to be a "normal mortal limit" than can be transcended through dedication or supernatural assistance. So no hard ceiling, but a soft ceiling right around there, with breakdowns like this:

• Normal Men (0 level): farmers, shopkeepers, soldiers, kings
• Veteran (1st-3rd level): an exceptional individual with a lot of experience or special expertise
• Hero (4th-7th level): a man among men, with some fame and name recognition
• Superhero (8th-12th level+): a legend among men. Conan, John Carter.

Levels beyond that are possible, but are usually the province of driven or obsessed individuals who are willing to sacrifice for the power: archmages, liches, demon-ridden warriors, and the like.

I think that scheme suits campaign play in D&D very well.

 

[Hereticus]

No level cap. The game should evolve beyond the restrictions of level and you should be able to make your character advance as far as you and your DM deem fit for their story.

I mean, in real life, you keep learning things until you die, so your character should too!

People also forget things when they are inactive.

We imposed an "experience point tax" that only effects epic level creatures. Any creature with 21 or more levels/HD loses their level percent of their experience per year, until they go below epic. This slows down advancement, and prevents ageless creatures from reaching 40 levels and beyond.

A mildly active epic creature will usually retain its levels, only the most active adventures will reach into the 30s and stay there. A very powerful creature that goes into torpor will awaken at 20th level.

This is no logical rationale for this, other than it works and fixes a problem in the system.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Huh?

There was some spam that I reported that got excised.

 

[Jhaelen]

Somewhere from 10 to 12 levels, I'd say. To answer a question like this, it's also important to consider the pace of levelling, I think.

In 1e/2e the pacing was too slow for my taste, especially that things slowed down to a crawl in the two-digit levels.

In 3e/4e the pacing is about right to allow a campaign to realistically run its entire course with the pcs being at max level in the end.

 

[messy]

20 just feels right. the d20 system makes it feel even better.

does this thread need a poll?

 

[scourger]

Not to be snarky, but what's the point of unused levels?

Well, although I've never played much past level 10 (if at all), I like the idea that the game goes to level 20. My favorite d20 game of all, Omega World, only went to level 10; and one of the only innovations I really liked about Conan OGL was that the hit points basically stopped after level 10 (there was a small increase afterward--sort of a throwback). It just acknowledges that the sweet spot for me and mine is somewhere around level 7.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

D&D needs only enough levels for the DM to enable the PC's to reach the limits of power that he wants PC's to be able to reach, and accompanying rules for them to do so in the time frame he wants to allow.

The number of levels is thus unimportant. What is important is what is to be done with any limits or lack therof.