How many levels?
- Thread starter Szatany
- Start date
Enough so that you need more than one year of weekly gaming to reach them.Szatany said:
No. Just use logarythmic XP progression after some levels. The higher, the harder.
After a final BBEG, you know have the right to play sub-zero and rayden ! No, this is not a video game.
Mouseferatu
Hero
I don't know if it matters exactly how many levels there are (though 30 sounds like a good number). I do believe--and I'm going to get yelled at by the epic fans 
--that there should be an upper cap. There comes a point at which the constantly increasing numbers simply don't mean anything any more. (And there should be some things which mortals simply cannot do.)
If there must be advancement rules beyond the cap (be it 30 or wherever), they should do at least one, if not both, of the following:
1) Offer a truly different game experience, not just higher numbers and optional mechanical systems.
2) Assume some form of divine ascension.
--that there should be an upper cap. There comes a point at which the constantly increasing numbers simply don't mean anything any more. (And there should be some things which mortals simply cannot do.)If there must be advancement rules beyond the cap (be it 30 or wherever), they should do at least one, if not both, of the following:
1) Offer a truly different game experience, not just higher numbers and optional mechanical systems.
2) Assume some form of divine ascension.
Szatany
First Post
I agree with that. IMO it's a good idea to reward players with bonus feats when they don't level up anymore.Mouseferatu said:I don't know if it matters exactly how many levels there are (though 30 sounds like a good number). I do believe--and I'm going to get yelled at by the epic fans
If there must be advancement rules beyond the cap (be it 30 or wherever), they should do at least one, if not both, of the following:
1) Offer a truly different game experience, not just higher numbers and optional mechanical systems.
2) Assume some form of divine ascension.
If you don't keep making interesting and new abilities for higher and higher levels (which is very difficult after certain point, of not impossible), the levelling just loses its charm. I'm all for a sudden stop somewhere (voted for 30).
Another thing I like about level cap is that some enemies will always remain a threat. A matter of taste I suppose.
Green Knight
First Post
Mouseferatu said:I don't know if it matters exactly how many levels there are (though 30 sounds like a good number). I do believe--and I'm going to get yelled at by the epic fans
If there must be advancement rules beyond the cap (be it 30 or wherever), they should do at least one, if not both, of the following:
1) Offer a truly different game experience, not just higher numbers and optional mechanical systems.
2) Assume some form of divine ascension.
Completely agree.
Victim
First Post
I like the idea of an advancement cap. It means that you can sensibly scale down from the top legendary characters as well as up from normal people. Sure, there are things mortals can't do. But if mortals can do something, then your character will be able to do it too - the biggest things in the setting are actually within reach, instead of being reserved for ultra high level NPCs.
Whizbang Dustyboots
Gnometown Hero
If there's a cap, 36 is traditional and not too far off from 4E.
Nyeshet
First Post
I can't really answer this, as it depends upon the system.
In one type of system, where say levels 1 - 5 are considered normal for NPCs, 10 - 20 might be enough. Those who reach those levels are 2x to 4x beyond what is considered typical excellence (level 5) for NPCs.
If an NPC can never reach beyond first or second level, however, I think no more than 10 levels should be allowed.
If NPCs are typically around level 3-8, on the other hand, I think around 15 - 30 levels should be allowed. Again, PCs have a maximum reach around 4x that of 'typical' high level NPCs.
That, in fact, is one of my issues with both D&D in general - the fact that (irregardless of edition, as best I can tell) NPCs are almost exclusively expected to be ~1st level, while PCs reach as high as level 20 or even 30 (in the coming 4e system). I associate level 1 with an initiate or journeyman - someone who has learned the basics well enough to start out on their own, but has not yet reached any level of mastery (and will not for quite a while yet).
What would I consider better for a 30 level system would be along the lines of:
level 1 - 3: journeyman
level 4 - 6: master
level 7 - 9: grandmaster
level 10 - 12: legendary
level 13 - 15: heroic
level 16 - 18: superheroic
level 19 - 21: epic
level 22 - 24: mythic
level 25 - 27: paragons
level 28 - 30: hero-deities (ie: not ascended, but has the potential)
level 31+ : ascended to least deity, maybe having a small cultic following at first
In such a system, most NPCs would be of levels 1 - 3, with some reaching levels 4 - 6, and some rare individuals reaching levels 7 - 9. Perhaps once a generation or two, each craft on a continent or two (ie: known world, to most NPCs) might have amongst its members a single individual who reaches level 10 - 12. PCs would be those rare individuals who have the potential to reach beyond this: the once every several centuries hero or superhero, or perhaps the once every thousand years epic or mythic. Paragons and hero-deities should be the "once every several thousand years or so one or a few come along who have been so blest by the deities as to have a chance to prove themselves worthy of joining them" type situation.
So, even in a 30 level system, I would expect NPCs to reach 5th level uncommonly but not necessarily rarely, and PCs to not typically reach beyond level 25 except in games that are specifically focused from the beginning on bringing about a potential deific ascension. So it ends up being more of a 20 level system, with PCs either working through or skipping the first five levels and rarely reaching into the last five levels.
If they want to make PCs so much more potent than NPCs, just state at the beginning of the PHB and DMG that PCs are expected to start at level 5 and be done with it. It allows for five levels of backstory to be built for the characters, it starts them off significantly stronger than the vast majority of NPCs, and yet it keeps the system from looking like an odd step function where one jumps from first (or zero) level "nobodies" NPCs to second (or first) level "heroic" PCs.
This is part of the reason why - in the current 20 level system - I typically start off PCs at 3rd level. The former three levels are the backstory of the PC, and they start high enough to be notably amongst NPCs - a highly skilled individual on the cusp of achieving uncommon mastery in their chosen class. Non-magical classes have enough skill to handle themselves against most NPCs - either they are lower in level and so not much of a problem, of about the same level and thus a bit of a challenge, or they are of higher level - the highest NPCs typically attain - are are a notable but not insurmountable challenge. Casters, by comparison, have second level spells, more than just a few spells known or per day, and likely have made a similar name for themselves by this time as well (albeit locally, compared to most NPC casters in the area).
In one type of system, where say levels 1 - 5 are considered normal for NPCs, 10 - 20 might be enough. Those who reach those levels are 2x to 4x beyond what is considered typical excellence (level 5) for NPCs.
If an NPC can never reach beyond first or second level, however, I think no more than 10 levels should be allowed.
If NPCs are typically around level 3-8, on the other hand, I think around 15 - 30 levels should be allowed. Again, PCs have a maximum reach around 4x that of 'typical' high level NPCs.
That, in fact, is one of my issues with both D&D in general - the fact that (irregardless of edition, as best I can tell) NPCs are almost exclusively expected to be ~1st level, while PCs reach as high as level 20 or even 30 (in the coming 4e system). I associate level 1 with an initiate or journeyman - someone who has learned the basics well enough to start out on their own, but has not yet reached any level of mastery (and will not for quite a while yet).
What would I consider better for a 30 level system would be along the lines of:
level 1 - 3: journeyman
level 4 - 6: master
level 7 - 9: grandmaster
level 10 - 12: legendary
level 13 - 15: heroic
level 16 - 18: superheroic
level 19 - 21: epic
level 22 - 24: mythic
level 25 - 27: paragons
level 28 - 30: hero-deities (ie: not ascended, but has the potential)
level 31+ : ascended to least deity, maybe having a small cultic following at first
In such a system, most NPCs would be of levels 1 - 3, with some reaching levels 4 - 6, and some rare individuals reaching levels 7 - 9. Perhaps once a generation or two, each craft on a continent or two (ie: known world, to most NPCs) might have amongst its members a single individual who reaches level 10 - 12. PCs would be those rare individuals who have the potential to reach beyond this: the once every several centuries hero or superhero, or perhaps the once every thousand years epic or mythic. Paragons and hero-deities should be the "once every several thousand years or so one or a few come along who have been so blest by the deities as to have a chance to prove themselves worthy of joining them" type situation.
So, even in a 30 level system, I would expect NPCs to reach 5th level uncommonly but not necessarily rarely, and PCs to not typically reach beyond level 25 except in games that are specifically focused from the beginning on bringing about a potential deific ascension. So it ends up being more of a 20 level system, with PCs either working through or skipping the first five levels and rarely reaching into the last five levels.
If they want to make PCs so much more potent than NPCs, just state at the beginning of the PHB and DMG that PCs are expected to start at level 5 and be done with it. It allows for five levels of backstory to be built for the characters, it starts them off significantly stronger than the vast majority of NPCs, and yet it keeps the system from looking like an odd step function where one jumps from first (or zero) level "nobodies" NPCs to second (or first) level "heroic" PCs.
This is part of the reason why - in the current 20 level system - I typically start off PCs at 3rd level. The former three levels are the backstory of the PC, and they start high enough to be notably amongst NPCs - a highly skilled individual on the cusp of achieving uncommon mastery in their chosen class. Non-magical classes have enough skill to handle themselves against most NPCs - either they are lower in level and so not much of a problem, of about the same level and thus a bit of a challenge, or they are of higher level - the highest NPCs typically attain - are are a notable but not insurmountable challenge. Casters, by comparison, have second level spells, more than just a few spells known or per day, and likely have made a similar name for themselves by this time as well (albeit locally, compared to most NPC casters in the area).
Last edited:
