Should Level Top Out?

[the Jester]

Back in the day, pcs topped out at 36th level (or considerably lower, in earlier editions). In AD&D, there was no level limit, nor was there one in 3.x. Now, in 4e, pcs top out at level 30.

What do you think about this? Should there be a "Top Level" that a pc can achieve? If so, what level should it be? If not, should the rate of advancement slow down as pcs get higher level? Or should it stay the same, or even speed up?

 

[Crothian]

No level limit so people who want to go higher have that option. But advancement rate should decrease.

 

[wingsandsword]

Back in the day, pcs topped out at 36th level (or considerably lower, in earlier editions). In AD&D, there was no level limit, nor was there one in 3.x. Now, in 4e, pcs top out at level 30.

What do you think about this? Should there be a "Top Level" that a pc can achieve? If so, what level should it be? If not, should the rate of advancement slow down as pcs get higher level? Or should it stay the same, or even speed up?

Point of Order:
AD&D did have level limits. Monk and Assassin did cap out in the teens. Giving all classes in the game the ability to progress to 20th level was promoted as one of the selling points of 2e AD&D by its marketing materials at the time.

The High Level Campaigns book for 2e put a hard cap on all mortal character progression at 30th level. Offhand I don't know of any 2e NPCs that exceeded 30th level.

Now, speaking in terms of the Forgotten Realms, which is the setting I know the best. . .

2e Elminster was a 29th level mage, The Symbul was 30th level as a mage, Halaster Blackcloak was a 30th level mage, Szass Tam was a 29th level Necromancer.

The only place generally in 2e books that any rules were even published for over 30th level was in the Faiths & Avatars series as rules for deities which seemed to be able to go up to 40th level. Among others, Lolth's Avatar was given as a Cleric 33/Mage 31/Fighter 20, Corellon Larethian's Avatar was a Fighter 36/Mage 35/Bard 29/Cleric 25. The only two Avatars I know of that even made it to 40th level were Mystra's Avatar which was a Cleric 40/Wizard 40 and Chauntea's Avatar which was a Druid 40/Cleric 20, and those were for the two most powerful deities in the Realms.

There was the Netheril: Empire of Magic box set which did have rules for PC spellcasters up to 45th level, but that was specifically for a pseudo-1e retro campaign in 2e set a few millennia before the Time of Troubles and thus technically still in 1e (complete with notes on how to retrofit 2e to be more like 1e), they had two NPC's that made it to 41st level, Ioulaum and Karsus. Given what Karsus did when he hit 41st level (and that Ioulaum vanished without a trace when he hit that level), I could almost see the 30th level cap being put in as some kind of divine barrier to mortal progression put in to prevent pesky mortals from almost breaking all of reality and a 40th level cap on Gods Themselves as put there by Ao as a way of ensuring that nothing like that would ever happen again.

 

[Wombat]

I am not fond of level limits (I'm also not fond of levels, but that is a separate matter). To set a limit is to say that the world can only grow so high and no one will ever, ever be any better, no matter what happens, which strikes me as faintly ridiculous.

OTOH, I am also not fond of "epic" adventures, so I rarely have to worry about such upper limits.

 

[Nifft]

Limits are fine, but Tiers do the job even better: all that's necessary is a clearly communicable way to let the players know the power range of a game-world, so they can make decisions appropriately.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Stalker0]

From a mechanical standpoint, there definitely should be a level cap. Any model no matter how good, breaks down as you stretch it out to infinity. Now unless you literally make every level an exact carbon copy of the previous level but just "stronger" then the model will break down eventually.

For people who want to play 50 level character, that's in the house rules territory for as we have seen with the epic level rules in the past the system just doesn't work that well.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I think level limits make sense.

I don't think of them as being a "hard cap" but rather the idea that at after a certain point the game can't help but to break down (both mathematically as well as storywise). 4e, for example, puts this soft cap at becoming a full-fledged demigod (or person of equivalent might). Your level 30 demigod might embark on a final quest with his companions to slay a god and steal his power (or whatever), but even if he succeeds is there really anything left for him to do (within the context of D&D)?

At a certain point the PCs would just be cutting their way through hordes of gods like they cut their way through hordes of goblins at level 5. It's just my opinion, of course, but I feel that any game where gods can be put down with the same effort as a few lowly goblins "jumped the shark" some time ago...

Even a non-combat game would be rendered virtually meaningless with the relative omnipotence and omniscience that would come with being on-par with the greater gods. I hear WW makes a decent game for that, but it really goes outside the context of your typical D&D game.

There might be DMs out there with the talent to still make such a game fun and interesting, but IMO any DM with the skill to do that has more than ample skill to write house rules that allow for exceeding the level cap. As for the rest (myself included), the cap is there for our own benefit as well as the game's.

 

[messy]

should there be a limit? i don't think so. i like the idea of "the sky's the limit," ie, that your game game potentially go as high as you want it to.

but i've capped my game at level 20. it just makes things easier for me when i know that the game has to stop somewhere.

messy

 

[Asmor]

If nothing else, it means not having to hear about Monty's 98-th level Thri-Kreen Fighter/Monk/Psion/Sorcerer.

I really don't have a problem with the level cap, and if you disagree with me you're a bad person and probably kick puppies.

 

[Protagonist]

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.).