This post is a continuation of a discussion that started in the Grimoire thread; I decided to continue the argument here so as to avoid leading that thread too far off-topic. Also, IMO the topic is more appropriate to Ascension anyway. The topic under discussion started with UK's estimates of the highest level creatures in a particular region could naturally reach, based on extrapolation of the rule that the number of characters of a given level is halved when you want the number of characters at the next higher level (i.e. 1000 1st-level means 500 2nd, 250 3rd, etc.). The post I am responding to can be found here.
And I didn't say they skip the levels, they just don't spend very long in them- if they survive. If I run a game in that world, starting from the base, I'll most likely begin the characters at 3rd, yes- but that's not saying they just skip 1st and 2nd. It just says that 1st and 2nd are sort of folded into their growth into full adults ready to do stuff on their own. Think of it this way: is the number of children in a given society always twice the number of adults? Sure, infant mortality is often high in societies at a typical D&D tech level, but even on modern-day Earth, is the number of children twice the number of adults? I don't believe it is.
Essentially, what you seem to be advocating is that all worlds absolutely have to start adult people at a skill- and health-equivalent to a 1st-level character, bar none, end of story. I'm saying that in some worlds with particularly harsh environmental conditions, people who make it to adulthood learn a lot more and are forced to become a lot tougher than the game allows for 1st-level characters- in game terms, the best way to model this effect is by having them be higher level. You can add skill bonuses and extra hit points or hit dice, sure, but if you do that you're really just simulating gaining levels anyway- or in any case that's my take on it. You could also say that characters in such a world gain enough to reach 1st level at a younger age, somewhere in childhood for example. Then, by the time they reach full adulthood, they're naturally higher level.
Human starting age is 15+1d4 years, so a 16-year-old character is quite possible.
Now, with regard to your idea of one level per year for adventurers- well, the previous editions of the game might have supported such a slow pace of level gain in practice, but 3E and 3.5 certainly aren't built on it! Whether or not you like the fact that 3E grants XP quickly enough for characters to level-up multiple times in the space of a few weeks, you must admit that the game is presently structured to force that to happen. Many adventures I've seen, in fact, are constructed to assume the PCs gain more than one level during the course of the story- and those stories certainly don't take multiple years to get through. The Adventure Paths (in both Dungeon and the original 3E path starting with Sunless Citadel) all have adventures in them that include this fast advancement, and Age of Worms certainly would play very differently if the authors allowed characters playing it to take 20 years to stop the cult's plans!
Of course, if deities do gain Quintessence simply by living a long time, that begs the question- how much do they get, and where does it come from? Since you have three mechanisms by which they can gain the stuff, one has to wonder which of the means is the best one for simulating this. Then again, perhaps it's a combination of all three, or different deities get them at different rates.
Fortunately, the idea doesn't have to sit well with you- just me and my group.Upper_Krust said:
And I didn't say they skip the levels, they just don't spend very long in them- if they survive. If I run a game in that world, starting from the base, I'll most likely begin the characters at 3rd, yes- but that's not saying they just skip 1st and 2nd. It just says that 1st and 2nd are sort of folded into their growth into full adults ready to do stuff on their own. Think of it this way: is the number of children in a given society always twice the number of adults? Sure, infant mortality is often high in societies at a typical D&D tech level, but even on modern-day Earth, is the number of children twice the number of adults? I don't believe it is.
Essentially, what you seem to be advocating is that all worlds absolutely have to start adult people at a skill- and health-equivalent to a 1st-level character, bar none, end of story. I'm saying that in some worlds with particularly harsh environmental conditions, people who make it to adulthood learn a lot more and are forced to become a lot tougher than the game allows for 1st-level characters- in game terms, the best way to model this effect is by having them be higher level. You can add skill bonuses and extra hit points or hit dice, sure, but if you do that you're really just simulating gaining levels anyway- or in any case that's my take on it. You could also say that characters in such a world gain enough to reach 1st level at a younger age, somewhere in childhood for example. Then, by the time they reach full adulthood, they're naturally higher level.
Point of order, the game actually assumes human characters start younger than that.Upper_Krust said:
Human starting age is 15+1d4 years, so a 16-year-old character is quite possible.The table is exactly the sort of thing I mean for time-based XP, yes; I haven't bothered to work one out for my own game, but that's largely because NPC age proves to be pretty irrelevant for most game purposes. For story purposes it might occasionally come into play, but typically the PCs just don't have reason to care.Upper_Krust said:
Now, with regard to your idea of one level per year for adventurers- well, the previous editions of the game might have supported such a slow pace of level gain in practice, but 3E and 3.5 certainly aren't built on it! Whether or not you like the fact that 3E grants XP quickly enough for characters to level-up multiple times in the space of a few weeks, you must admit that the game is presently structured to force that to happen. Many adventures I've seen, in fact, are constructed to assume the PCs gain more than one level during the course of the story- and those stories certainly don't take multiple years to get through. The Adventure Paths (in both Dungeon and the original 3E path starting with Sunless Citadel) all have adventures in them that include this fast advancement, and Age of Worms certainly would play very differently if the authors allowed characters playing it to take 20 years to stop the cult's plans!
Well, thank you- feel free to use it.Upper_Krust said:
Of course, if deities do gain Quintessence simply by living a long time, that begs the question- how much do they get, and where does it come from? Since you have three mechanisms by which they can gain the stuff, one has to wonder which of the means is the best one for simulating this. Then again, perhaps it's a combination of all three, or different deities get them at different rates.