D&D General Level Independent Challenges

[Clint_L]

I would argue that most challenges in D&D are level independent, in a practical sense. Levelling in D&D is mostly a treadmill where the mechanical difficulty of the traps, combats, persuasion checks, etc. is steadily increased by the DM to be commensurate to enhancements in player stats, spells, equipment, etc. The challenges that really matter - figuring out mysteries, solving puzzles, developing compelling characters - are completely level independent. They mostly just take time and investment, so characters do tend to level up while these challenges unfold.

Edit: when I'm creating story, I don't worry about the party's level until it is time to play, and then I tweak the creatures, DCs, etc. as needed. I'm about to re-use a campaign arc that originally took two groups from levels 1-5, but this time with a group that starts at level 5. It'll be a snap to make the adjustments.

 

[Lanefan]

I would argue that most challenges in D&D are level independent, in a practical sense. Levelling in D&D is mostly a treadmill where the mechanical difficulty of the traps, combats, persuasion checks, etc. is steadily increased by the DM to be commensurate to enhancements in player stats, spells, equipment, etc. The challenges that really matter - figuring out mysteries, solving puzzles, developing compelling characters - are completely level independent. They mostly just take time and investment, so characters do tend to level up while these challenges unfold.

Edit: when I'm creating story, I don't worry about the party's level until it is time to play, and then I tweak the creatures, DCs, etc. as needed. I'm about to re-use a campaign arc that originally took two groups from levels 1-5, but this time with a group that starts at level 5. It'll be a snap to make the adjustments.

The very fact you have to make those adjustments means the adventure and its challenges are not level-agnostic.

Level-agnostic means that with all other things being equal and nothing about the challenge being changed, the challenge is the same difficulty and-or offers the same odds of success/failure regardless of the level of the character(s) facing the challenge.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Level-agnostic means that with all other things being equal and nothing about the challenge being changed, the challenge is the same difficulty and-or offers the same odds of success/failure regardless of the level of the character(s) facing the challenge.

Which is true for a skill challenge that has not yet been applied to a game.

Which is what I said. A complexity N skill challenge offers the same difficulty regardless of what level you apply it to, because it is always (N+1)×2 successes before three failures (though as noted, I prefer slightly tweaked approaches; this is just the way 4e proper did it.)

Can you succeed (N+1)×2 times before you fail 3 times? That's a fixed difficulty regardless of your character level. I don't see how this is incomprehensible.

 

[Reynard]

Which is true for a skill challenge that has not yet been applied to a game.

Which is what I said. A complexity N skill challenge offers the same difficulty regardless of what level you apply it to, because it is always (N+1)×2 successes before three failures (though as noted, I prefer slightly tweaked approaches; this is just the way 4e proper did it.)

Can you succeed (N+1)×2 times before you fail 3 times? That's a fixed difficulty regardless of your character level. I don't see how this is incomprehensible.

There's nothing worse in a level based game than constantly scaling difficulties. Climbing the same wall at 1st level should not have a DC of 12 at 1st level and a DC of 25 at 15th level, or whatever. Why bother with levels at all then? Just say every action the PC takes succeeds on a 1-2 on a 1d6.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

There's nothing worse in a level based game than constantly scaling difficulties. Climbing the same wall at 1st level should not have a DC of 12 at 1st level and a DC of 25 at 15th level, or whatever. Why bother with levels at all then? Just say every action the PC takes succeeds on a 1-2 on a 1d6.

And if you had read my previous post, I explicitly said that you probably shouldn't do it that way.

 

[Clint_L]

The very fact you have to make those adjustments means the adventure and its challenges are not level-agnostic.

Level-agnostic means that with all other things being equal and nothing about the challenge being changed, the challenge is the same difficulty and-or offers the same odds of success/failure regardless of the level of the character(s) facing the challenge.

I don't see it that way. I see that challenge as something like "track the monster to its lair, defeat the monster to rescue the child, and safely return the child to her mother in order to win favour with a patron"(part of the opening arc of this chunk of campaign, in fact). The specific monster isn't the meaningful part of the challenge - I can (and do) slot any monster in there depending on what level the characters are, just as I can make the survival check to track it harder if I want.

There are some story arcs that are not level agnostic: "recover the ancient artifact to empower you to face the ancient dragon before it can unleash its fury upon the city" is not a low-level appropriate challenge. It would feel weird and unearned at, like, level 3. For me, though, things like DCs and monsters are often just [insert here] things. So that story arc I am currently reusing is truly level agnostic because I can reuse the whole thing without changing anything, aside from tweaking a few encounters on DnDBeyond.

 

[LordEntrails]

I don't see it that way. I see that challenge as something like "track the monster to its lair, defeat the monster to rescue the child, and safely return the child to her mother in order to win favour with a patron"(part of the opening arc of this chunk of campaign, in fact). The specific monster isn't the meaningful part of the challenge - I can (and do) slot any monster in there depending on what level the characters are, just as I can make the survival check to track it harder if I want.

And how do you determine "Track the monster to its lair"? Is this a skill check with a DC? The it's level dependent. "Defeat the monster" is, in D&D, level dependent because the monster has stats that I assume you are going to resolve with combat. SAfely return the child... well, assuming this is just take the rescued NPC to another NPC and their is nothing that has to be overcome to do si, then sure, it's level independent, but it's not a challenge.

 

[Lanefan]

Which is true for a skill challenge that has not yet been applied to a game.

In pure white-room theorizing this is correct. However, if you don't apply the skill challenge to a game, what's the point?

Which is what I said. A complexity N skill challenge offers the same difficulty regardless of what level you apply it to, because it is always (N+1)×2 successes before three failures (though as noted, I prefer slightly tweaked approaches; this is just the way 4e proper did it.)

Can you succeed (N+1)×2 times before you fail 3 times? That's a fixed difficulty regardless of your character level. I don't see how this is incomprehensible.

The difficulty is not fixed, though: the odds of each roll being a success or failure vary based on the character's level, due to its level advancing its skills.

 

[Pedantic]

The difficulty is not fixed, though: the odds of each roll being a success or failure vary based on the character's level, due to its level advancing its skills.

This is not quite true. The DC for a skill check inside challenge is calculated from reference to the level of the challenge, which is set entirely by the DM. Different DMs may set the same hostage negotiation as a level 8 or level 16 change. If a level 7 party is handing the level 8 version, and a level 15 party is handing the level 16 challenge, their resulting chances of success will be (very nearly, there's some variance in scaling) the same, despite the difference in their listed skill bonuses.

 

[bloodtide]

Well, basically.....Old School Role Playing

Complex Problem Solving: that is anything that will take more then a d20 roll or two.

When the game setting has a problem, like the elven and dwarf kingdoms are on the edge of a war and the PCs must find someway to make peace. Now as long as the DM does not set it up as "ok, just roll higher then a 10, and your characters make peace throughout the lands". If the DM makes it a Complex Problem, the players can't just "roll to solve it".

When the players have to do real investigation, not just "roll to have their characters know stuff". When the players have to keep track of facts, not just "roll to have their character remember things". When the players have to sift through the rumors, lies and facts and figure out things for real, not just "roll to have their character figure things out."

Solving mysteries for real, as long as the game is not set up for "just roll to solve the mystery".

As long as game is more complex then "the characters are murderhobos and kill anything that moves on sight", players will need to figure out real actions and tactics to win a fight. Even very simple tactics, have nothing to do with "level". Though you need a DM that adds a bit more to the game other then "whatever you do we will have Encounter 11, exactly as written."

Getting anything complex done, without direct combat, is also a thing. Assuming here the DM will let the players "win or beat" a combat encounter without slogging through rolls and rolls of combat.

Doing "downtime" things like running a business that are not "roll a d20 to see how much gold your business made this week". Having the player make a 'real' business plan and make profit.

So anything that is more complex then "one roll to win".