Literary sources and the three-Tier campaign model

[S'mon]

This came up in the Railroading thread.

The standard WoTC 4e campaign model described in the DMG, with examples in the DMG2, is 30 levels across three Tiers, with transitional revelations and major events at the beginning or end of each Tier. If you're playing for 5 hours every week you can level up about every 2.5 sessions, and cover a 10-level tier in 6 months, a long time IMO. Anything less and it will stretch out interminably - eg 2.5 hours a fortnight, 5 session to level at standard XP, gives 2 years per tier, and 6 years for a 30-level campaign!

So I think WoTC would do better to look at the design of fully satisfying campaigns focused on a single Tier, because I suspect that's a much more practical model for most people if you want a literary/cinematic approach. The big climaxes should be at most every 3 levels, not 10. And a typical significant adventure should be 1 level, not 3-4.

Looking at the literary sources, I think the 1-Tier model fits them better too. Eg the hobbits of LoTR have an Heroic Tier campaign, going from plucky novices to battle-hardened veterans (ca 1st-10th). Fafhrd & Mouser start around the beginning of Paragon when we meet them (ca 11th, arguably high-Heroic), and edge into Epic at the end of their 40-year careers. Elric starts off at the beginning of Epic when he's the first guy for centuries to summon a Chaos Lord, and caps out at 30th at the time of his demise. Conan in the REH stories seems to go more mid-high Heroic to mid-high Paragon - he doesn't display quite the level of supernatural powers that Leiber's Mouser does post-Rime Isle, but arguably he's a Paragon character in a low-magic world.

Not many literary heroes go from plucky novice to demigod across their saga. The exceptions tend to be game-derived, like Gygax's Gord the Rogue.

Now, for some people the 30-level campaign works fine, and campaigns don't need to be based on literary precedent. But given the practicalities of play for busy adults, and given the strong literary precedents, wouldn't it be a good idea for WotC to focus some support on full campaigns planned from the outset to be single-tier?

 

[Bedrockgames]

This came up in the Railroading thread.

The standard WoTC 4e campaign model described in the DMG, with examples in the DMG2, is 30 levels across three Tiers, with transitional revelations and major events at the beginning or end of each Tier. If you're playing for 5 hours every week you can level up about every 2.5 sessions, and cover a 10-level tier in 6 months, a long time IMO. Anything less and it will stretch out interminably - eg 2.5 hours a fortnight, 5 session to level at standard XP, gives 2 years per tier, and 6 years for a 30-level campaign!

So I think WoTC would do better to look at the design of fully satisfying campaigns focused on a single Tier, because I suspect that's a much more practical model for most people if you want a literary/cinematic approach. The big climaxes should be at most every 3 levels, not 10. And a typical significant adventure should be 1 level, not 3-4.

Looking at the literary sources, I think the 1-Tier model fits them better too. Eg the hobbits of LoTR have an Heroic Tier campaign, going from plucky novices to battle-hardened veterans (ca 1st-10th). Fafhrd & Mouser start around the beginning of Paragon when we meet them (ca 11th, arguably high-Heroic), and edge into Epic at the end of their 40-year careers. Elric starts off at the beginning of Epic when he's the first guy for centuries to summon a Chaos Lord, and caps out at 30th at the time of his demise. Conan in the REH stories seems to go more mid-high Heroic to mid-high Paragon - he doesn't display quite the level of supernatural powers that Leiber's Mouser does post-Rime Isle, but arguably he's a Paragon character in a low-magic world.

Not many literary heroes go from plucky novice to demigod across their saga. The exceptions tend to be game-derived, like Gygax's Gord the Rogue.

Now, for some people the 30-level campaign works fine, and campaigns don't need to be based on literary precedent. But given the practicalities of play for busy adults, and given the strong literary precedents, wouldn't it be a good idea for WotC to focus some support on full campaigns planned from the outset to be single-tier?

I really felt they should have focused more on offering different approaches to play. For me D&D is sort of the all-purpose fantasy game. So I preferred it in the past, when they gave more of an overview of different campaign approaches, highlighting the strength and weaknesses of each one. I see the merit of this approach, but it simply isn't how all groups like to play D&D.

 

[Mournblade94]

This came up in the Railroading thread.

The standard WoTC 4e campaign model described in the DMG, with examples in the DMG2, is 30 levels across three Tiers, with transitional revelations and major events at the beginning or end of each Tier. If you're playing for 5 hours every week you can level up about every 2.5 sessions, and cover a 10-level tier in 6 months, a long time IMO. Anything less and it will stretch out interminably - eg 2.5 hours a fortnight, 5 session to level at standard XP, gives 2 years per tier, and 6 years for a 30-level campaign!

So I think WoTC would do better to look at the design of fully satisfying campaigns focused on a single Tier, because I suspect that's a much more practical model for most people if you want a literary/cinematic approach. The big climaxes should be at most every 3 levels, not 10. And a typical significant adventure should be 1 level, not 3-4.

Looking at the literary sources, I think the 1-Tier model fits them better too. Eg the hobbits of LoTR have an Heroic Tier campaign, going from plucky novices to battle-hardened veterans (ca 1st-10th). Fafhrd & Mouser start around the beginning of Paragon when we meet them (ca 11th, arguably high-Heroic), and edge into Epic at the end of their 40-year careers. Elric starts off at the beginning of Epic when he's the first guy for centuries to summon a Chaos Lord, and caps out at 30th at the time of his demise. Conan in the REH stories seems to go more mid-high Heroic to mid-high Paragon - he doesn't display quite the level of supernatural powers that Leiber's Mouser does post-Rime Isle, but arguably he's a Paragon character in a low-magic world.

Not many literary heroes go from plucky novice to demigod across their saga. The exceptions tend to be game-derived, like Gygax's Gord the Rogue.

Now, for some people the 30-level campaign works fine, and campaigns don't need to be based on literary precedent. But given the practicalities of play for busy adults, and given the strong literary precedents, wouldn't it be a good idea for WotC to focus some support on full campaigns planned from the outset to be single-tier?

That is absolutely fantastic insight. If I could give you experience I would. I especially like how you cited Elric as an example of Epic.

The current video games (Which I love) give the feeling of novice to demigod as well (probably with the exception of mass effect). Most of these games take place over a 3 year period and one rises to challenge the gods. Dragon Age II at least took place over 10 years.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Dragon Age II at least took place over 10 years.

Yeah, the time jumps are an interesting feature of DAII, one that could be ported to level-based tt rpgs.

 

[Bluenose]

Yeah, the time jumps are an interesting feature of DAII, one that could be ported to level-based tt rpgs.

Pendragon assumes typically one adventure per year, and has the "Winter Phase" where you make various rolls to check what happens inbetween. Of course not level-based, though I see no reason why you couldn't grab the basic concept.

 

[Alaxk Knight of Galt]

I'd say the heroes in Wheel of Time go from Heroic to Epic. Especially Rand

 

[Mournblade94]

I'd say the heroes in Wheel of Time go from Heroic to Epic. Especially Rand

I think though this is from the 90's, that this phenomenon occurs more with literature from the post D&D sword and sorcery literature.

 

[S'mon]

The current video games (Which I love) give the feeling of novice to demigod as well (probably with the exception of mass effect).

D&D-derived games and books do have the trope; most fantasy CRPGs seem to start you off hunting rats in the cellar, and end with fighting Mephistopheles or somesuch. And it crops up in some D&D-influenced fantasy literature. My argument is that the older literary model makes for a more practical campaign, for most people.

And it has a further advantage I didn't discuss: PCs don't 'grow out of' their place in the world. The hobbits can go home to the Shire: they're now bad-ass hobbits, but they're not the New Kings of Gondor. Elric starts Epic, the greatest sorceror in the Young Kingdoms, and stays Epic. Mouser & Fafhrd start as bad-asses who can take down the Thieves' Guild, and end as more powerful bad-asses. I think there are significant advantages in PC creation especially at higher level to be able to say "This Guy is a Paragon Hero" and give him a backstory which reflects that - because sadly, develop-in-play does not always do that, especially if you're running published adventures.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

I'd start Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser in the heroic tier. In 4E, they could even be first level. They merely have a lot of adventures in a short time, and gain levels rapidly. By the time they are in Quarmal, they are pushing paragon, if not quite there yet. Or if you wanted slower advancement, start them around 3rd to 5th and top out about 10 levels later.

In earlier versions, you could still keep their arc in a small set of levels. They'd start at around 5th, and then run up to around 11th or so.

Not that any of this changes your overall point.

 

[S'mon]

I'd start Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser in the heroic tier. In 4E, they could even be first level.

In the adventure where they first meet, they trash the Thieves' Guild, which is supposedly more powerful than the Overlord, and take down a wizard who can cast Cloudkill.

Edit: This is subsequent to young 'Mouse' slaying a roomful of people with some kind of spontaneous psychic attack.