Justifying high level 'guards', 'pirates', 'soldiers', 'assassins', etc.

[S'mon]

I guess it's the stereotypical geek absolutist empirical mindset at work. Some people just need everything to fit neatly into an absolute structure. I'm often guilty of it myself.

No, what it is, is that levelling up and increasing all those numbers is a reward mechanic *because* it represents greater power in the game-world. Without that it's pointless for me. I would not be interested in playing D&D in a game where the GM levelled up everybody in tandem around my PC.

There are perfectly good games out there where PC power does not increase exponentially in relation to the world, like Runequest. If I want a game where after a year's play the pirates are still nearly as much of a threat, I'll play a game like that, not one where I have 20 times the hit points yet in practice everything stays the same. To me that's extremely unattractive game design.

 

[S'mon]

Give me OD&D/Basic/1E over this any day. Once I hit 9th level, I'm recognized as a ruler among men.

As the 40-year-old friend I introduced D&D to said, "If the NPCs all get better at the same rate as me, what's the point?"

That's exactly how I feel.

Furthermore, in the softer version where the faceless NPCs are gaining 1 level for every 2 I gain, you can save a lot of bother by only having me gain 1 level and they gain none, because half my levels are pointless.

 

[Snoweel]

No, what it is, is that levelling up and increasing all those numbers is a reward mechanic *because* it represents greater power in the game-world. Without that it's pointless for me. I would not be interested in playing D&D in a game where the GM levelled up everybody in tandem around my PC.

That's a fault of the GM then, isn't it?

There are perfectly good games out there where PC power does not increase exponentially in relation to the world, like Runequest. If I want a game where after a year's play the pirates are still nearly as much of a threat, I'll play a game like that, not one where I have 20 times the hit points yet in practice everything stays the same. To me that's extremely unattractive game design.

No, you were right the first time. It's a poor DM.

I mean, it's a matter of personal choice. Either the pirates are still going to be a challenge a year after you meet them or they won't.

And if they're not a challenge then why bother with combat mechanics? You could either make them a skill challenge or just narrate the encounter.

And if said pirates are still going to be a challenge then their levels will necessarily have to still be close enough to the PCs for combat not to be a foregone conclusion.

 

[Snoweel]

That's exactly how I feel.

Furthermore, in the softer version where the faceless NPCs are gaining 1 level for every 2 I gain, you can save a lot of bother by only having me gain 1 level and they gain none, because half my levels are pointless.

I think you'll find that half of one is more than zero.

 

[Oni]

A lot of what is being said here is merely a matter of personal taste in regards to how gritty the feel of the game vs. how superheroic. The mechanics are more than capable of supporting either. You want to see vast increases in power static levels for npc's you want a more even keeled gentle approach to scale relative levels similar to what I described in my first post. Mechanically speaking either of these are viable.

However I think that it is a silly arguement to make to say it doesn't make sense that NPC's are such and such a level, or that it's weird that they gained levels on guard duty because Level is a construct for running the game and has no context in the game world (well most anyway, I'm sure there are campaigns out there were the characters have a conception of levels).

For me personally I find that a sudden huge power gap can do more to pull me out of a gameworld in terms of how illogical it is (and somewhat cartoonish depending on the setting), than a change in level behind the scenes. I don't see leveling as pointless in a relative world situation, breadth and depth are an increase in power, even if one isn't given over to sheer numerical superiority.

Is the scale between a level one character and a level one minion the same as the scale between a level 30 character and a level 30 minion or has there been a relative increase in power, if so I guess leveling wasn't pointless.

 

[Psion]

This is one area where 4E kind of doesn't deliver on the promise that the heroes are "special". The PC's are special because they are doing the deeds that no one else is doing and not always because they are the only ones who can.

This, along with the "epic slime" thing, are two very unsatisfactory things about 4e to me.

The attitude in 3.x seemed to be that monsters would fill in the void at high level (I remember SKR saying as much). But even in 3e, they botched this stupidly in the Epic Level Handbook, with the city Union, guarded by men who elsewhere would be generals in charge of great armies, and bards with hanger-ons that would a "mere" 15th-20th level.

Unfortunate to see that 4e is carrying on the worst traditions of 3e. Ones you won't see emulated in my game.

 

[Xath]

A friendly Mod reminder to keep it civil.

 

[Fenes]

The problem with the "do not bother with thinking, all is just relative to the PCs" approach is that not everyone is swallowing this in every situation.

"Hey... what do you mean, we are the only ones who can save the city? Last week, when we got falsely accused of trying to kill the emperor we were outfought by the palace guards, and harried by the city guard until we could escpae and clear our name. If we can handle the Red Dragon, then they can handle him as well- they handled us. What do you mean, they are powerless against the dragon?"

 

[Korgoth]

No, what it is, is that levelling up and increasing all those numbers is a reward mechanic *because* it represents greater power in the game-world. Without that it's pointless for me. I would not be interested in playing D&D in a game where the GM levelled up everybody in tandem around my PC.

There are perfectly good games out there where PC power does not increase exponentially in relation to the world, like Runequest. If I want a game where after a year's play the pirates are still nearly as much of a threat, I'll play a game like that, not one where I have 20 times the hit points yet in practice everything stays the same. To me that's extremely unattractive game design.

We're on the same page.

One of the interesting things about guys like Conan (or Beowulf, had the Geats not been upstanding sorts that he was happy to protect) is that there's not a lot you can do about them. To borrow from an old joke: Where does Achilles sit on the trireme? Anywhere he wants.

If you somehow survive to 8th or 9th level in one of my games, I want to reward you with the feeling that you have joined the ranks of Conan, Aias and Chuck Norris. A marauding troll could probably tear through the town guards... and you can kill that troll all by yourself. Thus you could (if you wanted) tear through the town guards also.

I think it can serve to highlight the personality of the character: do you just murder half the town because you can? Villains do so. True heroes often put themselves at the (inconvenient) service of people that they could easily slay (it's called "humility"). Greek-type tragic heroes also use their powers to preserve the civil order, but sometimes go off the leash and the gods have to put them down. Conan-types are generally benevolent unless you mess with them, and then all heck breaks loose.

So high level play can give you the chance to show what kind of character you're playing. A hero? A villain? A tragic figure? A roughneck antihero? A character experiences a new-found freedom in the world when he has all that hard-won power. Now what will he do with it? I find that interesting.

 

[Delta]

And if said pirates are still going to be a challenge then their levels will necessarily have to still be close enough to the PCs for combat not to be a foregone conclusion.

No, here's the option you're overlooking: There could be more of them. Hundreds of them. In an armada of ships.

That's exactly how it worked in core OD&D/1E. Ideally you'd want a new combat mechanic that easily dealt with that scale, however. (As was provided with things like original Chainmail/ Swords & Spells/ Battlesystem.)