Opinion: PoL and high tiers do not fit in the long run

[Majoru Oakheart]

One camp (the camp I am in) says that high level characters are heroes because of what they have done and receive the benefits of that heroism in ways beyond merely leveling up and collecting more powers. In this style the characters gain titles, lands, alliances, lead cabals/knighthoods/mercenary armies, become prominant within their faiths, etc. In other words they impact the world in believable ways.

This CAN be true, but I don't see how gaining levels requires it. You could be level 30 without ever seeing another person to even tell them of your deeds. You ARE powerful but there's no reason to think that people would just suddenly know and come flocking to you to give you land, titles and armies.

Other times it might be possible for someone who is first level to accomplish something that is so amazing that they are recognized for their deeds and given status way beyond their level.

These things are role playing issues independent of how high level a character is.

In another style of play the PCs accumulate levels so they can assault the next dungeon which just happens to be just right for a band of 23rd level adventurers. This style of gaming makes hero a mechanical descriptor as opposed to the actual impact of the character on the setting. They build nothing and live in a weird episodic world where one thing doesn't actually connect to the next and the setting never really responds to them except by sending them more things to kill. The only goal for a PC in this style of game is achieving the next level and its powers, abilities and feats. IMO, if one plays with minis, this is equivalent to D&D as Monopoly. Hit 30th (or epic) level and you win the game.

This is not only not true, but rather insulting.

Take this example: A boy, around 16, trained with a sword by his father, growing up in a village...suddenly a dragon appears overhead. It burns the village and kills everyone in it, however, he was hidden by his parents in a safe place. He is the only survivor. He vows to defeat that dragon if it's the last thing he does. He knows where the dragon lives. It is deep within the Dark Woods. The woods are SO thick that it would take months, if not a year to reach the very heart of it where the dragon lives. Along the way, he is assaulted by waves and waves of creatures who live there. He finds himself getting better and better at using a sword as it is all he does all day, every day. For months he fights 2-3 encounters per day.

He eventually makes his way to the dragon, the largest in the world, and in a titanic battle defeats it, avenging his family and accomplishing his goal.

It's an adventure with a real story, goals beyond leveling, where the character is a full fledged 3 dimensional character, everything connects to each other in a logical manner.

 

[Lizard]

The problem is, in your own homebrew, which the Point of Light-game concept takes place, your heroes are the only heroes. That's why it's a game campaign concept, not a setting. We all expect that in your campaign, the player characters are the main protagonists, not the NPCs. Stabby McStab, the low-level Fighter played by Frank, will arise to become the legendary hero who will save his world together with Elfy O'Elf, played by his cousin Joe, and Dwarfy Dwarfstein, played by some other guy at the gaming table. Perhaps there'll be also Slutty Sorcerer-girl, and Knifey Knifemeister, the best knifeing rogue who ever is. Those are the heroes. They count. Nobody else does.

And if one prefers a universe where Our Heroes are one band among many, a group of wishful novices looking admiringly at the Great Heroes Of The World and hoping to one day be able to meet with them as equals, and, meanwhile, have as enemies, rivals, or allies other would-be greats?

I don't care if the POL setting supports this, since I won't use it; I care if the game mechanics and worldbuilding tools are predicated and balanced on the presumption that only a half-dozen people in the whole world have PC-like abilities. 'Cause if the demographics are anything like the 3e DMG, there's a LOT of people running around with at-will heals and at-will magic missiles. If they aren't...there are other problems.

 

[DandD]

If you are only interested in the game mechanics, then the PoL-game concept won't do it for you. Simple as that.
The good thing is, the PoL-game concept isn't part of your homebrew. It's only a suggestion how to play, especially meant to newcomer groups.
So, yes, if you wish to have a homebrew-campaign where a million more epic-level heroes run around, do it. Wizards of the Coast won't send in super-secret ninja assassins to you for playing another style than what they gave a baseframe work for.

 

[Wyrmshadows]

This CAN be true, but I don't see how gaining levels requires it. You could be level 30 without ever seeing another person to even tell them of your deeds. You ARE powerful but there's no reason to think that people would just suddenly know and come flocking to you to give you land, titles and armies.

Other times it might be possible for someone who is first level to accomplish something that is so amazing that they are recognized for their deeds and given status way beyond their level.

These things are role playing issues independent of how high level a character is.

I am not saying that gaining levels requires it. However, the PCs would probably have to live in a bubble if they made it to level 10 without quite a number of folks hearing of them let alone levels 20+.

I agree, that being a hero is necessarily tied to level, its just that higher level people are more likely to be recognized for their accomplishments due to the sheer number of such accomplishments thereby receiving the commensurate rewards and recognition for their deeds.

This is not only not true, but rather insulting.

Take this example: A boy, around 16, trained with a sword by his father, growing up in a village...suddenly a dragon appears overhead. It burns the village and kills everyone in it, however, he was hidden by his parents in a safe place. He is the only survivor. He vows to defeat that dragon if it's the last thing he does. He knows where the dragon lives. It is deep within the Dark Woods. The woods are SO thick that it would take months, if not a year to reach the very heart of it where the dragon lives. Along the way, he is assaulted by waves and waves of creatures who live there. He finds himself getting better and better at using a sword as it is all he does all day, every day. For months he fights 2-3 encounters per day.

He eventually makes his way to the dragon, the largest in the world, and in a titanic battle defeats it, avenging his family and accomplishing his goal.

It's an adventure with a real story, goals beyond leveling, where the character is a full fledged 3 dimensional character, everything connects to each other in a logical manner.

Your above example isn't what I am referring to in regards to the example I gave. Your example is actually a very, very rare kind of situation in no way indicative of the playstyle I am referring to. In most kill, level up, kill level up campaigns, the setting exists as a life support system for all the dungeons lying around. If you are running another type of game not related to my comments, then great.

I can't see how you can be insulted when the game you are running/DMing isn't one where the PCs are one dimensional XP sinks going from place to place killing things, robbing them and playing no part in the greater setting.



Wyrmshadows

 

[Fenes]

There's ABSOLUTLEY nothing stopping you from doing PoL in what you said. NOTHING.

You liberate a region held by evil monsters. Well, that's PoL right there. Very clearly PoL. Your current campaign has them establish trade routes - PoL. Diplomatic alliances? What about PoL prevents that? In fact, wouldn't diplomatic alliances be a very great goal for a PoL setting where you can get other points of light to work cooperatively?

Nothing you've said here contradicts in any way a PoL setting. In fact, in a non-PoL setting, there wouldn't be an evil region. After all, you need darkness for PoL. No PoL means no darkness, just light everywhere.

The whole idea of nation states is a very, very modern concept. In the timeframe that D&D is supposed to exist, nation states just didn't exist at all. At best, a nation was what you could control a few days from your city.

PoL doesn't mean that there are no cities. That's not true. There are cities. There may even be metropolis sized cities. What it means is no more modern nation states in your fantasy worlds. Considering that most campaign settings lack trains and instantaneous communication, that makes a great deal of sense.

So, as soon as I have a few wilderness areas, like borderlands, and no trains it's PoL? And if the "darkness" is taking the form of another country/nation/empire, or a trade organisation, it's not an evil region anymore?
Points of Light, as far as I understand it, means mostly isolated settlements. Once you connect them, make sure trade routes, and spread trade and money and law systems, like in feudal states, it's not PoL anymore. You suddenly have regional customs, civilisation spreading, and society rising above the village elder and his wife as leaders.
In short, all I hear about PoL is exactly that it lacks the greater links, the big regions with details and backgrounds, the influence of big cities spreading more than a few days wide.

Sorry, not my cup of tea. Give me Athen and Sparta, and their allies, locked in a struggle and heading toward war. Give me the Roman Empire, with Germans, Persians and other foes at the border and internal strive. Give me France, Burgundy and England, struggling for control over France. Give me the Hanseatic League, dominating the Eastern Sea. Give me The Arab Jihad, conquering half the known world and uniting it under one banner, clashing with the Franks and presisng the old Byzant back. Give me the Crusades, where one idea spread over all of Europe, and set armies into motion.

That's what I want, different civilisations, where internal and external threats have to be dealt with. Not a single generic isolated village beset by orcs.

In short, give me background, customs, history, a society to play in - not a few points of lights in a sea of darkness.

 

[Hussar]

And if one prefers a universe where Our Heroes are one band among many, a group of wishful novices looking admiringly at the Great Heroes Of The World and hoping to one day be able to meet with them as equals, and, meanwhile, have as enemies, rivals, or allies other would-be greats?

I don't care if the POL setting supports this, since I won't use it; I care if the game mechanics and worldbuilding tools are predicated and balanced on the presumption that only a half-dozen people in the whole world have PC-like abilities. 'Cause if the demographics are anything like the 3e DMG, there's a LOT of people running around with at-will heals and at-will magic missiles. If they aren't...there are other problems.

In any edition, using D&D mechanics to try to create a functioning world is a mistake. It doesn't work. It leads to all sorts of wonky corners and issues. At best, in 3e terms, the setting construction rules give you the barest background to work from and set your adventures.

There's a reason that the campaign design section in the DMG is about 3 pages long.

 

[Lizard]

If you are only interested in the game mechanics, then the PoL-game concept won't do it for you. Simple as that.
The good thing is, the PoL-game concept isn't part of your homebrew. It's only a suggestion how to play, especially meant to newcomer groups.
So, yes, if you wish to have a homebrew-campaign where a million more epic-level heroes run around, do it. Wizards of the Coast won't send in super-secret ninja assassins to you for playing another style than what they gave a baseframe work for.

I may have been unclear. If the game is predicated on PC-level powers being rare, and I make them common -- well, more common, on par with the number of classed NPCs in 3x -- does this break the already tenuous grip on pseudo-reality D&D has? A first level cleric with 3 Cure Minor Wounds and 1 CLW is already making the world very unrealistic; crank that up to 'unlimited at-will healing' and battles start taking forever as long as you keep the clerics protects. A first level wizard with 1 Magic Missile/day is not much of a threat; one who can produce an *unstoppable* attack which *never* misses, at will, is a lot more so. If there's only the PCs with these powers, no bigs. If every small town has a 1st level cleric, wizard, rogue, etc -- and likely some higher levels -- the world becomes a very odd place, even by D&D standards. High-level characters were always presumed rare, so their impact on the setting is minimal (and they're usually busy fighting each other), but low level characters are common, and if they're all 'ramped up' in power, it becomes much harder to ignore their effects.

 

[Hussar]

So, as soon as I have a few wilderness areas, like borderlands, and no trains it's PoL? And if the "darkness" is taking the form of another country/nation/empire, or a trade organisation, it's not an evil region anymore?
Points of Light, as far as I understand it, means mostly isolated settlements. Once you connect them, make sure trade routes, and spread trade and money and law systems, like in feudal states, it's not PoL anymore. You suddenly have regional customs, civilisation spreading, and society rising above the village elder and his wife as leaders.
In short, all I hear about PoL is exactly that it lacks the greater links, the big regions with details and backgrounds, the influence of big cities spreading more than a few days wide.

Sorry, not my cup of tea. Give me Athen and Sparta, and their allies, locked in a struggle and heading toward war. Give me the Roman Empire, with Germans, Persians and other foes at the border and internal strive. Give me France, Burgundy and England, struggling for control over France. Give me the Hanseatic League, dominating the Eastern Sea. Give me The Arab Jihad, conquering half the known world and uniting it under one banner, clashing with the Franks and presisng the old Byzant back. Give me the Crusades, where one idea spread over all of Europe, and set armies into motion.

Umm, you realize that Athens, Sparta and the Roman empire all work beautifully as a PoL setting? Your wilderness is the border of the Roman empire. Who wants to be an adventurer in Rome at 1st level? That would be boring. I'd rather be out there with the legions bringing civilization to the barbarians.

Now, Hanseatic League? Ok, you're out of PoL for the most part. Sort of. Then again, establishing those trade routes could easily be a PoL style campaign. Depends on exactly when you want. I would point out though that the League eventually fell and trade died. SOunds a lot like the rise and fall of PoL to me.

That's what I want, different civilisations, where internal and external threats have to be dealt with. Not a single generic isolated village beset by orcs.

In short, give me background, customs, history, a society to play in.

Again, nothing in PoL prevents that. Your Points of Light might be a bit bigger, but, that's not really a difference. Nothing prevents history, customs or background in a setting where you have the rise and fall of empires over thousands of years. PoL does not mean generic village beset by orcs. That's your assumption and is not supported by the text.

What it means is that you don't have modern nation states, which a lot of published settings had. Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms particularly are made up of nations. You won't have that so much in a PoL setting. Instead you get city states as the largest "national identity".

In the same way that you are Spartan or Athenian and NOT Greek.

 

[Fenes]

Umm, you realize that Athens, Sparta and the Roman empire all work beautifully as a PoL setting?

If your defintion of PoL covers those, then I have been playing PoL all the time, and the entire FR lore was PoL already. Even the modern nations you don't want work as PoL then - after all, there's always some wilderness, some jungle at the border, or beyond the sea.

So, no, I do not agree that this is PoL. We have the Roman Empire, not a few spread out villages and isolated towns. We have world-wide trade. We have shared cultures and customs, and laws, and government. We have a complex society, with classes and customs, and origins.

And the focus on the game is not on battling the wilderness to reach the next town, it's - if we head out into the wilderness, and don't deal with the plot to kill the Emperoros' adoptive son - to secure the trade route to the grain producing vassal region, to find the remains of the lost army and their leader to settle a dispute over his heritage, to punish a raiding band of barbarians, to spy on the neighboring kingdom.

When you're more likely to adventure in a town, and deal with thieves, assassins, evil cults and political rivals of your patron, than whack orcs on the road to gain coin, then it's not PoL.

 

[xechnao]

Instead you get city states as the largest "national identity".

In the same way that you are Spartan or Athenian and NOT Greek.

Ancients did not have any magic.
And why is it like this (PoL) in d&d ? Due to struggling with external threats is the answer. But this struggling has to be tied to the cosmology to make any sense by definition: exactly because it IS a fantasy setting with magic.