Making Things Different

[FireLance]

I didn't see any thread on Mouseferatu's latest blog post, so I thought I'd start one.

Basically, in his post, Mouseferatu argues that high-level D&D should have the potential to be different, not just a retread of low-level D&D with higher numbers and deadlier powers. One example that he mentions was the way that earlier editions gave high-level PCs strongholds and followers.

Frankly, this is an idea that I can get behind. However, when I started thinking about how high-level D&D could be different, I find myself a little short on inspiration. I suppose it is possible to model the fact that the PCs have a stronghold as a domain management mini-game (perhaps drawing on the rules from the 2nd edition Birthright setting), but apart from that, what are the kinds of issues that the PCs might have to deal with as leaders and landowners (L&L ? ) that would be (i) different from the issues they have to deal with as adventurers and (ii) interesting to play through?

Going beyond the example of managing a stronghold and followers, what are the other ways that D&D can be played differently at higher levels? How would you like the game to change as a player and as a DM? Would you be keen on rules for any of the following:

• Changing the mindset and culture of a society?
• Promoting the worship of a religion?
• Supervising the construction of some monument or some feat of engineering?
• Changing the climate and terrain of an area (say, turning a desert into a forest or a fertile plain) or even the laws of magic?

Anything else?

 

[Hand of Evil]

Changing the Landscape: think Hadrians Wall or the Great Wall of China, players should be the builders of something that will be a landmark in the campaign world.

Oops, you said that...

 

[Doug McCrae]

Ascending to godhood, creating an artefact, founding a knightly order, founding a religion, becoming head of a pre-existing religion, ruling a region, being regarded as 'the greatest' in a field of endeavour - knowledge, magic, healing, stealing, fighting.

I can see rules being provided for most of these, but probably not becoming head of an organisation. Generally getting involved in politics doesn't need any rules imo, because it's so variable, political systems so diverse, but it could do with some discussion or pointers to other sources of information. In 1e AD&D Gary says there are no rules for starting as a noblemen because he can make no assumptions about the political setup of an individual GM's milieu. And yet he does provide some rules for founding a stronghold. This doesn't make sense. (Ofc the former was probably just a justification, not a reason. The real reason is so one starting PC doesn't have a lot more status than another.)

 

[ExploderWizard]

Getting so hung up on their own egos that they decide that the only way the universe will be safe is for them to live forever.

So they begin the process of becoming liches/deathknights/skeleton warriors with the best of intentions, all falling into madness and evil in the process.

The PC's are now the supervillains of the next campaign. Start over and enjoy.

 

[Dausuul]

This is something I have been thinking about a lot over the last few years. In fact, I went on eBay and bought myself a full set of the one edition that really tried to support this model: BECMI. Not so much because I planned to run a BECMI game, but because I wanted to remind myself how BECMI approached it.

For those not familiar with it, BECMI (also known as Basic, Classic, or Rules Cyclopedia) was a highly simplified and stripped-down edition; it existed concurrently with AD&D and was meant as an introduction to the game, but it ended up becoming its own distinct product line. It consisted of five boxed sets, each one covering a range of levels: Basic (1-3), Expert (4-14), Companion (15-25), Master (26-36), and Immortal (mortal level no longer relevant).

The notable thing about BECMI was that each boxed set had a distinct focus. Basic was built around the classic dungeon crawl. Expert took the PCs out of the dungeon and into the wilderness. Companion gave them domain management and mass combat mechanics. Master set them on the long (very long) path to immortality. Immortal made them literally gods.

I think I would focus on three tiers, modeling them after the "cycles" that many mythological heroes followed. The first tier would focus on individual heroics and adventures in the traditional D&D vein; the PCs making a name for themselves and rising to glory. The second tier would focus on the PCs as rulers, concerned less with personally battling evil and more with dealing with threats to their domains. The third tier would leave these temporal matters behind and turn to the spiritual--the PCs' Grail Quest, as it were, seeking immortality or transcendence.

Mechanics-wise, D&D has spent decades refining the first tier, and there are plenty of wargames to work from as a basis for the second. I'm still having a bit of trouble figuring out the third... spiritual transcendence doesn't really lend itself to dice and number-crunching. BECMI's Master Set took a stab at it with its four paths to immortality, and that might be a good starting point (though all of the paths have major issues that would need fixing).

When 4E was announced and we heard about the tier system, I had high hopes that they were going to revive the BECMI approach, but it didn't really pan out that way. Paragon paths and epic destinies pay lip service to the idea, but in the end the higher tiers play out just like the lower ones... you're just crawling bigger dungeons and fighting bigger orcs.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

One could also scour the used RPG market and find a fine product known as Primal Order.

 

[Dausuul]

After some more thought, I believe 4E does in fact have some guidance to offer on the subject. The paragon path could be re-purposed to serve this function; instead of 4E's paragon paths, you'd have something like this:

• Monarch: The Monarch is a war-leader and ruler of a dominion. You gain a small army of followers, which grows as you gain levels, and can establish a domain.
• Guildmaster: The Guildmaster has a network of contacts, agents, and spies. You can send and receive secret messages across your network, have your minions carry out dirty deeds, and establish safehouses and hidden bases in enemy territory.
• Harbinger: The Harbinger is leader of a religious or spiritual movement. You can recruit groups of followers on a temporary basis, even outside your home territory, and you find support and allies wherever you go from those sympathetic to your cause.
• Nonpareil: The Nonpareil is a respected, admired, and feared master of some deadly art--be it magic, warfare, or assassination. Nonpareils do not have large groups of followers, but they can acquire a few highly skilled apprentices who wish to learn from a true master.

While there are obvious parallels here to the traditional D&D classes (monarch = fighter, guildmaster = rogue, harbinger = cleric, nonpareil = wizard), any class could take any paragon path.

Still thinking about epic destinies...

 

[the Jester]

Politics.

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

After some more thought, I believe 4E does in fact have some guidance to offer on the subject. The paragon path could be re-purposed to serve this function; instead of 4E's paragon paths, you'd have something like this:

• Monarch: The Monarch is a war-leader and ruler of a dominion. You gain a small army of followers, which grows as you gain levels, and can establish a domain.
• Guildmaster: The Guildmaster has a network of contacts, agents, and spies. You can send and receive secret messages across your network, have your minions carry out dirty deeds, and establish safehouses and hidden bases in enemy territory.
• Harbinger: The Harbinger is leader of a religious or spiritual movement. You can recruit groups of followers on a temporary basis, even outside your home territory, and you find support and allies wherever you go from those sympathetic to your cause.
• Nonpareil: The Nonpareil is a respected, admired, and feared master of some deadly art--be it magic, warfare, or assassination. Nonpareils do not have large groups of followers, but they can acquire a few highly skilled apprentices who wish to learn from a true master.

While there are obvious parallels here to the traditional D&D classes (monarch = fighter, guildmaster = rogue, harbinger = cleric, nonpareil = wizard), any class could take any paragon path.

Still thinking about epic destinies...

Interesting, and it feels vaguely BECMI-ish for some reason. I don't have my books, but wasn't there some sort of "destiny" mechanic in BECMI, perhaps at Companion level? I recall one could become a "paragon" of one's class. I also recall the "polymath", a destiny for jack-of-all-trades types. All that might just be vague misremembered recollection, but perhaps this notion of Polymath notion might make a nice counterpoint to your Nonpareil.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

At low levels the PCs are often looking for patrons to support their adventuring: The Baron puts out a call for brave men and women, the Mage hires the party to retrieve a macguffin etc.

At high levels, Monarchs come to the PCs to ask for their help. Desperate parents throw themselves at their feet begging them to save their children from the demon that has taken them.

The PCs can become patrons themselves, hiring lesser-known heroes to complete smaller quests that impact a larger quest of their own. If you and your players are up for it, you could go so far as to play out these smaller quests with lower level PCs as one shot adventures for a change of pace.