Will Levels be taken out and shot?

[Frostmarrow]

No. Levels and hit points work, and are perfectly familiar - comfortable to anyone who has played a CRPG/MMORPG. Resistance to levels usually comes from a segment of tabletop roleplayers, while the rest of the world doesn't mind them.

I like levels but that is not the point. However are they so important that it makes good business sense to chop up the market? I don't think so.

 

[Frostmarrow]

I think Levels and in particular the quest for the next Level is one of the great motivators of D&D. It's notable that CRPGs mostly take a very similar approach. I think they'd be very foolish to discard the lure of the level-up.

The quest for the next level is important, I agree. But so would the quest for the next point be. Only 'the next point' can be a special item or a new-found skill.

 

[nerfherder]

You're not solving anything there. You're just substituting "points" for "levels".

"This adventure is for 500-point characters!" No difference, really. You're telling the DM what range of characters can be used.

Yep. What levels do is give you a quick method to indicate power level.

What I'm hoping for from 4E is a less steep power curve. I think we're already seeing that to an extent with Star Wars Saga Edition, where 1st level heroic characters have 3 hit dice. This would make it less critical to match adventurer power level to adventures or encounters, meaning that any adventure would be useable by more groups.

 

[MerricB]

Well, I'm no designer. I'm convinced a clever designer can create a system of growth and experience that is compatible with a modules without level spans.

But this could work, couldn't it?

Encounter with goblins for 100 point party: 12 goblins @ 8 points. or

Encounter with goblins for 500 point party: 1 goblin captain @ 15 points, 1 goblin shaman @ 23 points, and 58 goblins @ 8 goblins.

The leader carries the map needed to advance the plot...

That's done in Living Greyhawk adventures.

At APL 2 (average party level 2), you face 2 goblins.
At APL 4, you face 4 goblins and 2 bugbears
At APL 6 you face 8 goblins and a Barbed Devil.

What's the advantage of using points? None.

Indeed, Dungeon magazine has been using "Scaling the Adventure" sidebars for a long time now.

What makes multi-level adventures harder is that high-level PCs have capabilities that low-level PCs don't. An adventure structure for 1st level PCs looks very different from that for 20th level PCs - and if it doesn't, it should.

Cheers!

 

[Frostmarrow]

Yep. What levels do is give you a quick method to indicate power level.

Yes, but it doesn't take equipment into account, so it's next to useless as a power level indicator.

Points are more exact - and points stack.

 

[MerricB]

Yep. What levels do is give you a quick method to indicate power level.

What I'm hoping for from 4E is a less steep power curve. I think we're already seeing that to an extent with Star Wars Saga Edition, where 1st level heroic characters have 3 hit dice. This would make it less critical to match adventurer power level to adventures or encounters, meaning that any adventure would be useable by more groups.

The lessening of the power curve would be nice.

Interestingly, one of the reasons the power curve is so steep is because of wizards. The 3e powercurve just brings fighters into the same power range... which indicates exactly how good wizards were in previous editions.

So, redo the effectiveness of wizards, and you can slow down fighter advancement as well.

Cheers!

 

[nerfherder]

Yes, but it doesn't take equipment into account, so it's next to useless as a power level indicator.

The DMG contains useful guidelines for equipment that an average character is likely to have at each level. The DM should be able to compare the equipment the characters actually have to these guidelines to work out if they are under or over this baseline power level.

Are you saying that you would like equipment to be bought with points, like Hero?

Points are more exact - and points stack.

What do you mean by stack, in this context?

 

[Frostmarrow]

What makes multi-level adventures harder is that high-level PCs have capabilities that low-level PCs don't. An adventure structure for 1st level PCs looks very different from that for 20th level PCs - and if it doesn't, it should.

Cheers!

This is a good argument to keep the level structure. Higher levels have fantastic spells that can solve an entire low level adventure in one casting.
I'm afraid the designers are going to have to nerf some of those...

 

[MerricB]

Yes, but it doesn't take equipment into account, so it's next to useless as a power level indicator.

Points are more exact - and points stack.

No, your idea of points has them as more exact and stacking. I don't think that's true in reality.

A +5 vorpal sword (200 pts) in the hands of a Human Commoner (1 pt) would give a 201 point character. However, that human commoner wouldn't survive a round against any PC of above 4th level... and I don't think that 4th level PC is 200 points.

Meanwhile, a +5 vorpal sword in the hands of a 20th level human fighter in the current system is *scary*.

The level system *does* take equipment into account. It assumes the PCs have a certain level of wealth.

Cheers!

 

[Baby Samurai]

Now Vancian magic - that will be deader than a very dead thing, and probably be replaced by a per-encounter alternative or something.

Please God.

None of this assumed "4 encounters a day" shenanigans.