What is adventuring?

[RealAlHazred]

Wow! So "Levelling Up" has 0 votes!

Now, I know its a 'pick one' vote... but really...?

Not one person thinks that levelling up and gaining appreciably more power is a main feature of "adventuring"?

... I mean, I mainly use Hero System, which doesn't use levels. Or, occasionally, RuneQuest, which doesn't use levels. Or, hopefully, Warhammer Fantasy RolePlay, which doesn't use levels. Or...

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Etsy tells me that adventuring is going on a hike in a park.

 

[payn]

Not one person thinks that levelling up and gaining appreciably more power is a main feature of "adventuring"?

A result of, an under the hood application, a secondary consideration, or just not the interesting part of adventuring in RPGs.

 

[Umbran]

Well, sure, because that adventure is woke! Gloriously woke!

Hardly.

"NPCs have goals, motivations, and desires that aren't directly murderous" is not "woke".

I love that scenario, but it is highly unlikely that many groups will make it through without combat. Possible, absolutely, and teams dedicated to figuring out how to do it will probably figure it out, but it's still unlikely for many D&D groups I've run for.

Yeah, well, if your players really like the murderhobo vibe, it'd be a challenge.

Beyond that, though, all it really takes is, get this - asking politely what others want - and ways to get by without killing present themselves.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

The obnoxious harengon who has been used in the marketing for Witchlight seems unlikely to respond to a well-reasoned argument, but he's meant to be an especially big pain in the ass.

 

[Corinnguard]

Wow! So "Levelling Up" has 0 votes!

Now, I know its a 'pick one' vote... but really...?

Not one person thinks that levelling up and gaining appreciably more power is a main feature of "adventuring"?

Only if you are like this guy.

 

[Theory of Games]

I hear some folks here seem to consider adventure different criteria for different games?

That's because the definition of adventure can vary game to game. Some of us have graduated beyond Fantasy rpgs

 

[RealAlHazred]

Beyond that, though, all it really takes is, get this - asking politely what others want - and ways to get by without killing present themselves.

Exactly! Groups that talk to the XP will figure it out. Groups that do not will probably end up fighting. I've run both types groups, I expect it will still be fun for either! Just... differently.

 

[RealAlHazred]

The obnoxious harengon who has been used in the marketing for Witchlight seems unlikely to respond to a well-reasoned argument, but he's meant to be an especially big pain in the ass.

He's actually surprisingly easy to deal with if you pay attention to just one of the details in his (ever-present) art, and talk to other people...

 

[Staffan]

IMHO, the answer is no. When a character starts adventuring, they are just starting at being an adventurer. They're learning how to fight off a monster and the various minions who work for a particular villain within the setting. They're going out into the wider world and they're interacting with other people in the outside world, some of whom they had only heard in stories the bards have told to them. But as they continue to adventure, they become stronger and more powerful. Leveling up in an RPG is the metric by which we, the player, know as to how powerful our characters have become. Without that metric, can we really tell where our characters are in terms of ability and power?

I disagree that you need to start adventuring, or at least start an RPG campaign, as a novice. You can, but you definitely don't have to. The hobbits in Lord of the Rings might be novices, but Aragorn, Legolas, Gimli, Boromir, and Gandalf certainly aren't. Amos Burton, Naomi Nagata, James Holden, Alex Kamal, and Roberta Draper certainly aren't the equivalent of 1st, or even 3rd, level characters when we first meet them. Xena has many skills, and a background as a warlord terrorizing nations. John Sheridan is a decorated war hero, and Delenn is secretly a member of the ruling council of the second most powerful (well, third) nation in known space.

That said, when we meet most of those, they're all coming into a new context. The Fellowship is going on a quest to destroy the One Ring. The future crew of the Rocinante are seeing their mothership the Canterbury being destroyed, and themselves being drawn into interplanetary intrigue. Xena is leaving her warlording days behind her, and trying to be a hero instead. John Sheridan is being assigned command of a space station and start being not just a starship captain but also a diplomat. That's where the secret sauce is coming from: competent characters with a fair bit of (not necessarily detailed, but alluded to) background story coming into a new situation and seeing how things shake out.

And I think that works in RPGs too. While a lot of Critical Role's initial success can be attributed to Matt Mercer's DMing skill and world-building, and the players being what Matt Colville referred to as "professionally charming", I think part of it is that they had already been playing for a while. The PCs had established dynamics, and were starting at something like level 7. I wonder if maybe that's why I never could get into one of their subsequent campaigns, because they were starting at low level (2-3 IIRC) and having that awkward establishing stage, and that just didn't appeal to me.

I think danger is important. It doesn't require combat, but suspense, the threat of discovery and possibly combat, or just dangling off a cliff edge, that's integral. Discovering strange new places, yeah- and finding treasure.

Wow! So "Levelling Up" has 0 votes!

Now, I know its a 'pick one' vote... but really...?

Not one person thinks that levelling up and gaining appreciably more power is a main feature of "adventuring"?

Not of adventuring itself. It's something that might happen as a consequence of it, but "grinding XP" or the equivalent has never appealed to me.