Should Level Top Out?

[fba827]

there doesn't need to be a level limit if it will be supported by information (be it free webpages with info on how to build an encounter appropriate for level ranges, or actual books, or whatever).

But if it's not going to be supported in some form/fashion, then, yes, there should be a level limit.

Me, personally, it wouldn't get that high, because after a while it just gets ridiculous (to me, a complete personal opinion; sure, it's fun to say "my level 99 fighter can level the universe with but a single swing of his sword" but what then what... "my level 300 fighter can level 3 universes with a single swing of his sword" ? -- yes, i'm over simplifying and using hyperbole, but yo get my point). Also, for me as a DM, it is harder to plan out arcs if I don't have some vague idea of what the potential power level of the PCs is for that arc. Having said that, I see nothing wrong with that option being there for people who want to take advantage of it and are able to do creative things with it that I couldn't do!

Edit: to add, from a mechanical design perspective, and somewhat from a DM perspective, it is, however, much easier, if not "cleaner" if you have an idea of the max level to help design adventures and content -- it gives a relative power scale when you know where on the spectrum a certain power level is.

 

[Asmor]

also, in 4e if you would continue to use the 1/2 level bonus beyond level 30 the 1d20 roll would lose almost all importance in relation to the + added afterwards (which of course also includes item bonuses, circumstance modifiers etc.).

That would only be true in cases where the person rolling and the thing they were rolling against differed in "level" by 40 or more.

A level 100 PC rolling against a level 100 enemy gets as much benefit from the half-level bonus as a level 1 PC does against a level 1 enemy.

 

[Bumbles]

As long as levels reflect the power level of the characters, then yes, it will need to top out at some point.

Of course, that is an arbitrary number, depending entirely on the granularity of the system...

 

[Cadfan]

I think there should be level limits. I'm skeptical about the ability to make a system that plays well and still extrapolates outwards indefinitely. You'd have to use some kind of algorythm, and I'm just not convinced it can be done well.

 

[Ed_Laprade]

No. But only as an option. If someone wants to do the work of extrapolating according to the optional rules, fine. But the game designers shouldn't have to, and probably can't anyway, in practical terms.

 

[Protagonist]

That would only be true in cases where the person rolling and the thing they were rolling against differed in "level" by 40 or more.

A level 100 PC rolling against a level 100 enemy gets as much benefit from the half-level bonus as a level 1 PC does against a level 1 enemy.

Ok, I have to admit that I didn't think that one trough. Still, if you don't factor in unique ability feats (i.e. not your +2 to something type thing) and more powers (which by the time you are 30 should already be way more than you will ever use even in a long encounter, I reckon) it will then be only bigger numbers vs. bigger numbers.
If it is indeed balanced, level 10 vs level 10 foes and level 100 vs level 100 enemies will be (just like many videogames actually) just be the same thing with some zeroes added to each important number. Dealing 10 damage against a foe with 50 hit points and dealing 1000 dmg to a monster with 50000 hit points offers no real benefit apart from maybe a psychological one.**

And you can only add so many really unique* things like new abilities and class features without screwing up balance and increasing the number of items on the char sheet to a level where you need an accountant to manage your character sheet.

* and even looking at the classes from level 1 to 30 one can argue that aside from some role-specific stuff like marking or healing targets, a lot of the powers are combinations of "x points of damage" and "x number of status effects". With more than 10 classes and already 30 levels of powers you will probably have a hard time coming up with really unique stuff for level 31 to 100 ^^

** Up to a certain point I see the value of increasing the numbers, because it will give you the option of crushing lower level foes with a single blow or being virtually unkillable by conventional means. However, the difference between level 1 and 30 certainly should be big enough and 4E has the concept of minions to help run mook scenarioes anyway.

 

[Victim]

Yeah, I think that there should be a maximum level. It's much easier to design both mechanics and settings that way.

 

[SKyOdin]

I think a hard level cap is necessary in an RPG. Without one, the very meaning of levels becomes undefined. That is why I like 4E's nicely structured system of 30 levels divided among three well-defined tiers. That structure gives a common base-line such that everyone knows what each level represents in terms of actual power. Without that baseline, it becomes impossible to define things, particularly on the high-end of power levels. How many arguments did we see in 3E on what level the gods should be?

I have also noticed that a lack of a clear level cap and definition of tiers leads to several annoying trends:
1) Arguments that powerful beings should be well outside of the reach of regular characters, such as making gods level 60 when regular advancement stops at level 20.

2) Blatent fanboyism. I have seen my share of arguments that James Bond is Epic level (in d20 Modern) or that Sephiroth would be level 100. Without a level cap, the only limit on a character's level is how much of a fanboy/fangirl the DM is for that character.

 

[Dice4Hire]

I am a fan of level limits, because I ahve seen no game systems that can handle characters from farmboys to greater gods well, if at all. Sure games can handle a portion of that range, maybe even a majority of it, but not the whole thing.

I would raher see a game system do part of that range well, rather than try to do it all with ridiculous results (3.0 epic handbook comes to mind.)

 

[Samnell]

I've recently been convinced that an upper level limit is a good design tool to have, since it's the only way you can properly scale things to fit the world. I would prefer it be in the 30-40 range, though. Big enough that there's another a league beyond the greatest powers in the main game world, but not so big that it's totally ridiculous to see and fight such powers as the climax of a long game.

Power beyond the level cap might be possible, but it should come via some kind of templates or whatever instead of more and more levels.