GnomeWorks
Adventurer
And also getting a little stale.
The Chump to God model
- Thread starter Sadrik
- Start date
And also getting a little stale.
Sadrik
First Post
Last edited:
Theo R Cwithin
I cast "Baconstorm!"
I don't agree. IMHO, the essence of D&D play is whatever the group makes of it. It's a function of the group, not the ruleset. There are plenty of groups that end play in the heroic tier (chump to badass, maybe?) and plenty others who start play at the mid-levels and progress to god-hood. Some even roll up epic characters just to go up the ladder of divinity. And many groups play in different styles from campaign to campaign.
D&D (and many other games) is flexible enough to accommodate many playstyles or "conceits", once all the preconceived notions about setting or expectation are abandoned at the door. It's a creative enterprise, after all.
Sadrik
First Post
I'll take a slight differnt bent
Luke Skywalker is about right.
-Star Wars: dude vs non-jedi, chump vs. jedi
-Empire: badass vs. non-jedi, dude vs. jedi
-Jedi: god vs. non-jedi, bad-ass vs. jedi
How true
I like both a other approaches to.
I used to play. Child to Veteran Adult by simply making the average no count NPC 5th level. Simple and since most of campaigns stopped at 10 it worked nicely. 0 levels where kids under 14.
I think I can do the same for most levels systems if needed, but right now I have a group of players that have only played a few times several years ago or never at all I going to stick to High Power for the first time. (Slow it down with lots of rollplaying)
I used to play. Child to Veteran Adult by simply making the average no count NPC 5th level. Simple and since most of campaigns stopped at 10 it worked nicely. 0 levels where kids under 14.
I think I can do the same for most levels systems if needed, but right now I have a group of players that have only played a few times several years ago or never at all I going to stick to High Power for the first time. (Slow it down with lots of rollplaying)
If the essence of something "is whatever the group makes of it" then it doesn't exist. Growth from weakling to power is a conceit of the ruleset and can only be tamed through draconian change. You can play jacks with D&D if you adjust the ruleset enough.
If I want to drive a nail, I reach for a hammer. If I want to put in a screw, I get a screwdriver. Sure, I could creatively use the hammer for the screw, but I might as well use a tool specifically designed for the purpose if it available.
RPGs are the same. Every RPG* is created to handle a type of genre, play theme, and play expectations as best the designers could manage. It is a specialised tool that is flexible enough to be manhandled into alternate roles if desired. I prefer to use a specialised tool if one is available.
* Even the "generic" RPGs handle specific types of genre, play theme, and expectatrions better than others. GURPS, for example, is fine for fantasy, but is a poor substitute for D&D's ascension to power.
Theo R Cwithin
I cast "Baconstorm!"
Capping D&D's level advancement is hardly "draconian change".
D&D is a set of rules, and nothing more. It does a particular fantasy genre that models growth from weakling to power quite well, but that is not the only thing it's capable of. Any "conceit" beyond just the rules is something each player puts there himself. Granted, that something is very often some cultural expectation of what D&D "is", but at the core, it's still just the rules.
I largely agree, but I'd wager that quite a few gamers just don't have the luxury of seeing it as a screwdriver versus hammer sort of distinction. To my mind, D&D is more like a Swiss army knife: not the perfect tool for most jobs, but a pretty good substitute in most situations.
D&D is very popular compared to other systems. Many, many casual gamers aren't even aware that other systems exist, or don't want to bother learning a new set of rules, or shell out for another set of books. If I want to maintain a group of such gamers, I need to get creative.
Fortunately, D&D presents a flexible system that lets any group play a fairly broad range of power levels without having to learn a new system. By doing something as simple as limiting the starting or stopping levels, and adding a ton of fluff, the look and feel of the game can change dramatically: play up to heroic tier for "grim'n'gritty" or play "superheroic" if that's what you want. Nothing (not even in the rules, btw) says you are required to play across all the tiers to play "correctly". And that's very good thing, indeed.
One thing I keep away from is the notion that my group is slaved to some designer's intentions or some pseudo-philosophical notion of what constitutes "appropriate gaming". Honestly, I think most designers would be tickled to learn their ruleset gets mileage beyond the original intent. And if by some twisted accident of ego someone is offended by such an idea, well they can kiss my sweet candy a**
It has been neither a boon, nor has it crippled. It simply is.
Those that play D&D but don't like playing high power levels usually just slow down and/or cap advancement, so they never get to be gods. Simple, and effective.
Those who don't like playing chumps can simply start at a level above 1st. Again, simple and effective.
Having one strong leader in gaming, with a specific model ingrained in it has, I think, been good for the hobby as a whole - it fosters innovation and differentiation in the rest of the publishers.
Similar Threads
