Leveling Likes

[Diamond Cross]

How come Runequest gets so little love on these classless and leveless threads? It pretty much started them.

Because this forum is dedicated to the shiny and new and old games are looked on with contempt here. I however, am not one of those people.

And no, i'm not being snarky or facetious or sarcastic. I mean that in all seriousness.


But, this is a thread about leveling.

And what I like is that I like seeing my character progress. In fact I don't really start getting attached to my character until after he's gained a few levels.

 

[S'mon]

Because this forum is dedicated to the shiny and new and old games are looked on with contempt here. I however, am not one of those people.

I rarely see contempt for anything here on ENW. If I want to see contempt I go over to RPGnet!

 

[kaomera]

I like getting new powers and abilities that let me crush my enemies, drive them before me, and hear the lamentation of their women. I particularly enjoy becoming more powerful vs existing in-game foes, I don't want goblins to all become 2nd level just because I hit 2nd.

I'm not really a big fan of the whole XP and leveling thing, but if you're going to power up then I agree that you should actually power up. I also really like the idea of the story reflecting increases in character power in a meaningful / interesting way. Not so much "XP are a real thing in the game-world" but rather that there's a reason that the PC gained a particular ability above and beyond that the player picked it (be it training, a specific experience, etc. and either on-screen or off).

 

[Herremann the Wise]

Hello Everyone,

There are quite a few things I like about levelling:

o The opportunity for new abilities to further define how I imagine my character being as well as the direction they are intending to go in (who the character wants to become).

o The sense of distinction that comes with achieving a certain level. From a young age, something that struck a chord in my young mind was the AD&D level titles eg. for a Paladin: Gallant, Keeper, Protector up to Paladin. I used to love this - a single word could capture so much imagination in a young boy, perhaps more so than now.

o I love meshing good mechanics to flavour and levelling is at the coalface for this. It is the imagining of what a new set of abilities will bring in the adventuring ahead. It is like a frontier to be tamed.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Lanefan]

What I like about levelling is the sense of having achieved something. I played in one 2E AD&D campaign for years, where XP and treasure were few and far between, and it seemed like there was never any progress. With d20, levelling is faster and there are more benefits attached. Better saves, better BAB, hit points, skill ranks. Having these quantifiable improvements on a fairly regular basis keeps me more focused and more excited.

You're coming at the game from a different (and younger) direction than I, then; as from reading this I get the sense that you play in order to level up.

For my part, I think of levelling as - while a nice reward - not much more than a pleasant side effect of playing the campaign. The sense of achievement comes largely from finishing adventures, completing missions, and so forth.

I'm not a fan of systems where characters bump frequently, if for no other reason than I haven't got used to its new abilities yet and suddenly there's more piling on.

And when a higher level means facing opponents with more magical attacks and defences, the minor improvements from gaining a level in 2E simply aren't enough. D20 assumes that your equipment also improves. True, that's very much down to the DM, but I like that it's been incorporated into the system.

The power curve is much steeper in 3e than 2e; monsters and opponents (and characters) scale out way farther in 3e - which is good and bad at the same time. Good in that the DM can always find a decent challenge for you, and bad in that no matter how high of level you are you're still getting kicked in the teeth at every turn. If I am going to level I want there to be a sense that I'm growing in power related to the game world around me, not that the world's power is happily marching along right beside me.

Lan-"27 years, 10 levels, and counting"-efan

 

[wolfpunk]

Just a quick thought, I actually like games where you have levels but where your profession is not inside the skill system. That way you can have a Supreme Court Judge who is simply a man or woman with an incredible understanding of the law.

If the players should decide to engage a Supreme Court Judge in a battle of law, then the DM should arbitrarily decide the bonus that the Judge receives should a roll become necessary (probably a +20, but depends on scale of the game).

Perhaps a simple rule of thumb could be you get a +1 bonus to die rolls related to your profession for each year you have had the profession.

 

[S'mon]

I'm not sure where people are getting this idea that Supreme Court justices are necessarily brilliant legal minds - they are political appointees, after all. Likewise in an RPG setting a general may not necessarily be either the highest level Fighter or a brilliant strategist, he may have been chosen for other reasons, like loyalty and pliability.

 

[DrunkonDuty]

I think it's called idealism. And RPGs do tend toward ideals.

 

[Mark CMG]

Setting aside the various verdicts on the Supreme Court . .


The side discussion on "rewards" caught my eye as being particularly germane to the discussion of leveling because I think it ties closely to how leveling gets defined. How is the term "rewards" being defined for each of you who think of it when discussing leveling and how does that definition help define what leveling becomes?

 

[Celebrim]

By 'leveling' I'm going to take that to be a term which encompasses the entire idea of characters that evolve mechanically, because if I look at it that way I think its easier to explain what I like about 'leveling' and why I consider it important.

I believe that at their heart, RPGs are story telling games that are most closely rooted in the make believe games of childhood. I believe that they have incorporated different concepts from War Gaming and Theater Games, but at there heart they remain more so than either of those things games about creating a story. I believe that what differentiates an RPG from a wargame or a board game or even a theater game is how it relates to the idea of a story. The very fact that D&D creates this concept called 'leveling' is indicative of the fact that its a new type of game that is going to follow from and record a story of a sort.

Almost all stories involve some concept of character development. The character is not at the end of the story the same person that he was at its beginning. There are a few stories about a persons failure to develop as a character in response to a changing environment, but typically these aren't the stories that inspire RPGs. The sorts of stories that inspire RPGs typically involve characters passing through some sort of crucible and emerging on the other side tougher, wiser, wealthier or not.

I like leveling when it reflects the evolving nature of the character, and even conversely, when the evolving nature of the character as reflected in his mechanical changes feedsback into the story and changes the sorts of stories that are supported by the game.

Now, not every sort of mechanical change necessarily needs to be the sort that D&D encourages. I'm not a huge fan of GNS theory and I have some strong disagreements with the particulars, but it is somewhat useful shorthand so:

a) In a gamist game, good leveling is the reward for a job well done. Under a gamist perspective, the level you have should in some way reflect the skill of the player. You don't see a lot of this in modern D&D, but it was a strong undercurrent when Gygax talked about good gaming. Leveling in a gamist game is fun because it means you've accomplished a goal. Good gamist leveling makes the reward satisfying - you can now do something new and exciting.
b) In a narrativist game, the mechanics represent aspects of the story so the mechanics should evolve in accordance to how the character actually changed. The concept of 'advancement' that is normally implied by terms like 'leveling' and which is critical to the gamist perspective isn't as important as the fact that the mechanics track the descisions you've made and the major events of the characters life thus far. Good narrativist mechanics force you to feel the consequences of your decisions and alter your characterization accordingly.
c) In a simulationist game, the motives of the narrativist game marry with the means of the gamist game. While the simulationist is less concerned with mechanics impacting the way he makes choices and characterizes the character, he still wants the character to evolve in accordance with what the character is accomplished. Since this is usually overcoming some challenge, the simulationist wants the mechanics to track increased (or sometimes decreased) ability to overcome challenges of the same sort. Good leveling in a simulationist game reflects how what you do reflects changes in your characters skill. Leveling here isn't so much the reward, as it is seen as the natural consequences of doing something repeatedly.

I've always thought that Chaosism CoC/BRP had the most elegant leveling of any system because it addressed pretty much all of those concerns well.

For me D&D's leveling system has made up for what it lacks in granularity for what it does to help force along the basic hero story of D&D. To me, fixing the system such that gameplay is basically the same at higher levels as it is at lower levels (and vica versa) greatly misses the point.