Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Must-have advancement options for a playtest?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 5493164" data-attributes="member: 3192"><p>I think multi-level group adventuring needs to be designed into your system, if you plan on offering it. I've talked before about balancing by scope and not by class level. That is quite tricky, but defines a different game for each player based upon the class they play. Others ways will work still even if you do balance all classes to have the same power at the same level.</p><p></p><p>Think of it quantitatively. If one player has a 100pt PC (class no longer being relevant), another has a 200pt PC, and a third a 900pt PC, then some mechanism is needed to enable the players as a team to re-balance themselves. This power sharing means enabling the players to purposely choose to lower a powerful PC or raise a weak one. </p><p></p><p>In a fantasy game I think every power can be traded. For example, movement could even be magically traded from one PC to another, if they party finds a means to do so. But I suggest a Class / Gear dichotomy, if you are going off a d20 model. </p><p></p><p>So, to continue the example, we have a 50pt 1st Class PC w/ 50 pts of Gear, a 100pt 2nd Class w/ 100 pts Gear, and a 450pt 9th Class w/ 450 pts Gear. This is where the playtest begins. </p><p></p><p>If you have designed a cooperative game, then it is in the interests of the players to share power to better enable their own PC's success. Working together means a better chance of both individual and group success, a form of enlightened self interest. So maybe "it's a loan" or "a trade" for a weaker item, but the system makes power sharing a player choice.</p><p></p><p>In the end you may get a 100+200+900 = 1200pt party splitting themselves into roughly 300-500pts for 3 PCs to build challenges against. But I wouldn't require it. Rather let the players learn optimal strategies through play. The totals will constantly be in flux throughout game play anyways. Not to mention how division of treasure (Gear) will really start to matter. </p><p></p><p>By having static Class statistics you should be able have some simplicity for figuring out your DC rating progression vs. die rolls - at least for anything you want static to all classes, like combat traditionally. Also, average totals for party power rather than individual PC totals, even though you can track both, will provide for appropriate challenge creation. Generating monsters, treasure, environment, and whatnot could be quite simple. </p><p></p><p>Lastly, if you are going the multi-level PC party route, I would suggest starting all PCs at level 1, 0 XP. This rewards not only long term play with higher power levels, but also cautious play, and a means of introducing new PCs who do not have knowledge of the world the other players/characters will have gained from play.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="howandwhy99, post: 5493164, member: 3192"] I think multi-level group adventuring needs to be designed into your system, if you plan on offering it. I've talked before about balancing by scope and not by class level. That is quite tricky, but defines a different game for each player based upon the class they play. Others ways will work still even if you do balance all classes to have the same power at the same level. Think of it quantitatively. If one player has a 100pt PC (class no longer being relevant), another has a 200pt PC, and a third a 900pt PC, then some mechanism is needed to enable the players as a team to re-balance themselves. This power sharing means enabling the players to purposely choose to lower a powerful PC or raise a weak one. In a fantasy game I think every power can be traded. For example, movement could even be magically traded from one PC to another, if they party finds a means to do so. But I suggest a Class / Gear dichotomy, if you are going off a d20 model. So, to continue the example, we have a 50pt 1st Class PC w/ 50 pts of Gear, a 100pt 2nd Class w/ 100 pts Gear, and a 450pt 9th Class w/ 450 pts Gear. This is where the playtest begins. If you have designed a cooperative game, then it is in the interests of the players to share power to better enable their own PC's success. Working together means a better chance of both individual and group success, a form of enlightened self interest. So maybe "it's a loan" or "a trade" for a weaker item, but the system makes power sharing a player choice. In the end you may get a 100+200+900 = 1200pt party splitting themselves into roughly 300-500pts for 3 PCs to build challenges against. But I wouldn't require it. Rather let the players learn optimal strategies through play. The totals will constantly be in flux throughout game play anyways. Not to mention how division of treasure (Gear) will really start to matter. By having static Class statistics you should be able have some simplicity for figuring out your DC rating progression vs. die rolls - at least for anything you want static to all classes, like combat traditionally. Also, average totals for party power rather than individual PC totals, even though you can track both, will provide for appropriate challenge creation. Generating monsters, treasure, environment, and whatnot could be quite simple. Lastly, if you are going the multi-level PC party route, I would suggest starting all PCs at level 1, 0 XP. This rewards not only long term play with higher power levels, but also cautious play, and a means of introducing new PCs who do not have knowledge of the world the other players/characters will have gained from play. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Must-have advancement options for a playtest?
Top