Will Levels be taken out and shot?
- Thread starter Frostmarrow
- Start date
Kunimatyu
First Post
gizmo33 said:
You're taking the metaphor too seriously.
Thankfully, that alternative system is already (mostly) there, in the form of psionics/power points. A few changes to that system and you're good to go.
Alternatively, give spellcasters warlock-like unlimited abilities and a small group of rechargeable powers ala Bo9S. Both are viable, easy to understand, and cool alternatives to spell slots.
D&D needs to lose the mentality of fighter=easy+low-powered, wizard=hard but high-powered. A newbie should be able to start off equally easily with a fighter or a spellcaster, and slowly gain mastery over their character as they level and learn more about the rules.
TwinBahamut
First Post
Will the often rumored 4E get rid of levels?
I hope not.
Having played in Alternity and Champions campaigns, I know that there are advantages to point-based systems, but they have many drawbacks. The extreme difficulty in creating characters is probably the most distinct. In such a system, it is just about impossible to just give someone who has never played the system before the main book and actually have them create a viable character. These systems are simply unfriendly for new players.
I hope not.
Having played in Alternity and Champions campaigns, I know that there are advantages to point-based systems, but they have many drawbacks. The extreme difficulty in creating characters is probably the most distinct. In such a system, it is just about impossible to just give someone who has never played the system before the main book and actually have them create a viable character. These systems are simply unfriendly for new players.
Insight
Adventurer
I don't want to get rid of levels, but I want levels to mean more than they currently do. What I'd like to see is a better balancing act between different characters of the same level.
Level 1 = 30pts to spend on ability scores, skills, feats/abilities, and equipment. Level 2 = 45 pts, etc. Get rid of classes - or better yet, make them templates which can be used by the less mathematically inclined (or those new to the system) to help them build characters. Or perhaps classes exist to give you 'buckets' of points in the different areas: the Fighter class allows you to spend your level's points on BAB, DEF, HP, STR, DEX, CON, and Combat Feats, while the Wizard class allows you to spend your level's points on HP, DEX, INT, WIS, Magic Feats, and Spells. Prestige Classes might give you access to buy things you might not normally be able to buy, or might change the ratio of how you can spend your points.
Your level system still exists, and people have a harder time cheesing the system via loopholes, LAs, and other craziness. As long as the point costs make sense (and are balanced against each other), I think you have a system that would attract people, especially with the D&D brand name behind it.
Level 1 = 30pts to spend on ability scores, skills, feats/abilities, and equipment. Level 2 = 45 pts, etc. Get rid of classes - or better yet, make them templates which can be used by the less mathematically inclined (or those new to the system) to help them build characters. Or perhaps classes exist to give you 'buckets' of points in the different areas: the Fighter class allows you to spend your level's points on BAB, DEF, HP, STR, DEX, CON, and Combat Feats, while the Wizard class allows you to spend your level's points on HP, DEX, INT, WIS, Magic Feats, and Spells. Prestige Classes might give you access to buy things you might not normally be able to buy, or might change the ratio of how you can spend your points.
Your level system still exists, and people have a harder time cheesing the system via loopholes, LAs, and other craziness. As long as the point costs make sense (and are balanced against each other), I think you have a system that would attract people, especially with the D&D brand name behind it.
tenkar
Old School Blogger
Frostmarrow said:Levels can be tacked on.
0-99 points = 1st level
100-199 points = 2nd level
...
So what is the point to going to "points" if levels can be tacked on? Anyhow, levels (and classes for that matter) are an integral part of DnD... they are not going anywhere. You can count that as an "I told you so"
The game you are looking for is not DnD... as someone else stated you are describing GURPs fairly well... great sourcebooks, not much in the way of adventures. My guess is designing adventures for a points system that has to cover PCs of varying power is much more difficult then designing a module for PCs of a known power level. PCs of a certain level have abilities that can be accounted for in module design... not so easy to do in a points system.
Personally I like the idea of levels and classes, as do I suspect the majority of DnD players. To remove them from the game would leave us with a different game, and alienate the current fan base. If DnD players wanted a point system they would be GURPs players instead.
MoogleEmpMog
First Post
tenkar said:So what is the point to going to "points" if levels can be tacked on? Anyhow, levels (and classes for that matter) are an integral part of DnD... they are not going anywhere. You can count that as an "I told you so"
The game you are looking for is not DnD... as someone else stated you are describing GURPs fairly well... great sourcebooks, not much in the way of adventures. My guess is designing adventures for a points system that has to cover PCs of varying power is much more difficult then designing a module for PCs of a known power level. PCs of a certain level have abilities that can be accounted for in module design... not so easy to do in a points system.
Personally I like the idea of levels and classes, as do I suspect the majority of DnD players. To remove them from the game would leave us with a different game, and alienate the current fan base. If DnD players wanted a point system they would be GURPs players instead.
While I agree with the general point that levels and classes are both beneficial for an integral to D&D (classes less so than levels, though the two concepts seem to be inextricably entwined in most tabletop RPG designers' minds), it's not fair to say 'D&D without classes and levels would be GURPS.'
GURPS is, by intention, tuned to 'realistic,' 'gritty' play, with other power and realism levels being derivations from that baseline. GURPS is setting-neutral except as regards power level, and includes both rules tweaks and character options to adjust power level. GURPS has no 'core story,' no assumed model of play.
D&D's power level and 'realism' vary wildly during the course of a 1-20 campaign, or even a 1-10 campaign. D&D has very strong setting elements tied to the core game: a fantasy setting, medieval-ish equipment, Tolkienesque races, etc. D&D doesn't necessarily have a core story - but it often seems like almost every high level adventure involves saving the world and most lower-level adventures involve saving a PART of the world, which makes D&D's core story: save progressively larger portions of the world as you grow more powerful. D&D does, however, have an assumed model of play: cooperation between characters with specific party roles, the dungeon environment (even if it's cosmetically different), killing things and taking their stuff.
Even if GURPS were to become class and level based, it would not be D&D (it would be closer to Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay gone generic). Even if D&D were to become point-based, it would not become GURPS (it would be closer to Mutants & Masterminds, although M&M admittedly DOES have levels, though not classes).
Frostmarrow said:
Well, this just doesn't make any sense. You've veered from arguing that everything is the same level, to there being no adventures, only adventure templates, and wiping out every significant difference in spells except raw damage and DC changes.
Most people aren't going to be excited about buying adventure-templates, anymore than they'd be excited about manipulating abstract postulates in place of numbers in a math class. Which is more compelling: Hall of the Fire Giant King or Hall of Some Humanoidish Templated Creatures? In fact, you already couldn't do that, because part of that example is dealing with the giant-sized architecture, furniture, doors, etc.
Example #1: Merric pointed out Living Greyhawk which has scaled adventures. When I've played LG, even they don't put them all in the same book. What I've seen is 10 different adventure books printed at different levels, and the DM grabs the right one. Stat blocks are already long enough, who would want to have to stare down 20 pages per encounter of mix-and-match stats? Ugh.
Example #2: You can already say "I told you so" because there was a d20 company making programmatic scaled adventures -- you'd go to their website, choose an adventure and a level, and it would print out the adventure with monsters scaled to that level. I can't remember or find a link to it, because apparently it wasn't popular enough to stay in business with that model!
Mishihari Lord
First Post
Frostmarrow said:
We could hope, but it's not going to happen. Leveling is the payoff in D&D. You get a bunch of new power at once and it feels GOOD. It's what keeps people coming back. Personally I don't care for levels, but I have to admit I understand the appeal. D&D wouldn't be as popular without it.
Remathilis
Legend
Heres a better question...
Will levels continue to be 1-20?
Currently, the game has a scaling that makes level 1 puny, 5 survivable, 10 strong, 15 powerful, and 20 uber-deity. "Epic" level seem an afterthought and don't do anything more than "like level 20, but more". It also makes advancing a level a big occasion.
However, FF, WoW, and Everquest never stopped at 20. They stopped much higher, like level 50, 70 or 99. Perhaps D&D should do that as well...
Imagine a D&D that granted (1) bonus every time you leveled, but you leveled x5 as often. When you leveled, you could add a spell level, saving throw bonus, attack bonus, skill bonus, hp, feat, class ability etc. There would have to be limits to it, but it would work something between WoW and DDO (which has "levels within levels" to make advancement smoother) rather than BOOM instant improvement in all things.
It seems like a nice compromise between point-bought improvment and leveling...
Will levels continue to be 1-20?
Currently, the game has a scaling that makes level 1 puny, 5 survivable, 10 strong, 15 powerful, and 20 uber-deity. "Epic" level seem an afterthought and don't do anything more than "like level 20, but more". It also makes advancing a level a big occasion.
However, FF, WoW, and Everquest never stopped at 20. They stopped much higher, like level 50, 70 or 99. Perhaps D&D should do that as well...
Imagine a D&D that granted (1) bonus every time you leveled, but you leveled x5 as often. When you leveled, you could add a spell level, saving throw bonus, attack bonus, skill bonus, hp, feat, class ability etc. There would have to be limits to it, but it would work something between WoW and DDO (which has "levels within levels" to make advancement smoother) rather than BOOM instant improvement in all things.
It seems like a nice compromise between point-bought improvment and leveling...
Similar Threads
