Musing on Conan themes in RPGs

[Bill Zebub]

No leveling. you are Conan, you don’t start level 1.

I very much agree that it should be a flat power curve. No "levels", but slowly increasing abilities/talents/etc.

The weird phenomena in level-based RPGs, where at level 1 you stand no chance against a level 3 monster, but then when you're level 5 it stands no chance against you, seems inappropriate to the Conan setting.

EDIT:
The other thing it would need is a combat system with an action economy that doesn't favor the side with greater numbers as dramatically as, say, D&D.

 

[Committed Hero]

No leveling. you are Conan, you don’t start level 1.

He may not get more powerful as gamers picture it, but Conan starts off as a thief and becomes a king. I wouldn't be surprised if that was the intent of the original D&D rules whereby PCs become rulers after a time. If a character is increasing in "abilities/talents/etc." it's a level system by any other name, just grainier.

 

[MGibster]

He may not get more powerful as gamers picture it, but Conan starts off as a thief and becomes a king. I wouldn't be surprised if that was the intent of the original D&D rules whereby PCs become rulers after a time. If a character is increasing in "abilities/talents/etc." it's a level system by any other name, just grainier.

I think he was already a king in the very first story published. That's the thing about Conan stories, they're not told in chronological order.

 

[Bill Zebub]

If a character is increasing in "abilities/talents/etc." it's a level system by any other name, just grainier.

Disagree. Language has a purpose, and what's the point of even using the word 'level' if it's going to apply to any kind of progression? While true that most RPGs have some sort of progression, "level" is a useful term for distinguishing between two different general designs. Why make the word useless?

 

[Bill Zebub]

I think he was already a king in the very first story published. That's the thing about Conan stories, they're not told in chronological order.

Really? Which one was it?

I've always read the story in the order they are presented in the book collections, which is chronological (as best as the editors could guess, I suppose.)

 

[MGibster]

Really? Which one was it?

I had to look it up, but The Phoenix on the Sword was first published in 1932 and Conan had recently taken the crown from King Numedides and was in charge of Aquilonia.

 

[Yora]

It creates an interesting situation in which continuous readers of the series read most of the stories of the rowdy adventurer with the knowledge that in the end he will be a king.

The first two stories are the second and third last in the chronological order. After The Phoenix on the Sword and The Scarlet Citadel, there's only the big epic showdown of The Hour of the Dragon. Which is both the last and by far largest story that was written.

 

[Committed Hero]

I think he was already a king in the very first story published. That's the thing about Conan stories, they're not told in chronological order.

My point is that he progresses in power and influence chronologically.

 

[Committed Hero]

Disagree. Language has a purpose, and what's the point of even using the word 'level' if it's going to apply to any kind of progression? While true that most RPGs have some sort of progression, "level" is a useful term for distinguishing between two different general designs. Why make the word useless?

The only difference is that levels give improvements in chunks rather than piecemeal. A point buy system is just as much a tool for comparison.

 

[Bill Zebub]

The only difference is that levels give improvements in chunks rather than piecemeal. A point buy system is just as much a tool for comparison.

Is there another word, better than 'level', that you would prefer to use to describe the difference between a game in which you gain power/abilities piecemeal, versus one where you achieve that in chunks with numbers/labels attached to them?

EDIT: I understand that in theory the distinction could have no relevance to gameplay, because a highly granular progression could still be based on levels. But in practice that would mean a lot of levels. So in general the distinction between leveling and non-leveling games tends to be a difference in power curves.