Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="catastrophic" data-source="post: 5659619" data-attributes="member: 81381">That's not correct at all. As I said, the stakes would still differ by level. So your level would define wether you were fighting orcus to save the world, or fighting some goblins to save a village.  The level system would define the kind of threats you would face, but the gm would be free to draw the combat stats for those threats from ALL the monster resources which would normally be mostly innaccessable by level without a bunch of revision.  With a combat systme free of level, you can take whatever monster build you want, and use it in the part of your game where it makes the most sense.  That winged rampaging giant spellcaster might be orcus, or it might be a gargoyle warlock villain who they take down in heroic tier. The combat stats are the same, but the GM gains the ability to use any given monster at the perfect time in their campaign.  People might say "What? Orcus should be a special fight!" Well frankly, every fight should be a special fight, and every monster should be memorable and well made.  And again, this gives GMs that option- if they want to sav ethe super-solos for later levels, they can. If they want later levels to be defined more by say, hordes of low-power foes built as swarms, they can do that too. It's up to the gm to decide the kind of threats and the character of the threats the pcs fac ein various plotlines. I think this would result in better design for the powers and monsters that games actually use. Rather than stretching those constructs across 30 levels, the game could focus the best possible design, take more risks and make less generic 'filler' monsters, and also offer suplements with new monsters that would be useable at any level.   don't think most games do that that well, especially as levels climb. Focusing level on the idea of the impact the pcs are having on the world would enhance that experience.  I don't have a problem with a power curve, in fact what i'm talking about is emphasising that. All I want to do is remove level from combat mechanics.  I agree that that is a serious draw, but I feel as if it's not the kind of thing that will keep people coming back to a tabletop RPG in this day and age, with the alternatives they have.  There are things unique to rpgs, like colaberative story, and a custom-made sort of entertainment, which I think could be enhanced by moving away from levels. Currently, it's assumed that levels bolster them; I feel that removing levels could actually serve those other goals better. Frankly, when I think of what keeps a game going, I think 'leveling up' is hugely overtrated.  It's often down to things like 'manage to get a routine going without too many scheduling problems' and 'does this group of semi-strangers hit it off/does this group of friends prove compatable in this context'.  Keeping a game going is pretty hard- and I think it's presumptuous to assume that leveling helps that much when well, there are plenty of level-based D&D games that fail, regardless of how much leveling is going on.</blockquote>

Verification