I had a lot of thoughts about leveling and levels and I have the question; Do you really have to level to have fun? How levels are described and function they seem like measure of power potential rather than a real progression. Example being how you can kill a guy and suddenly know a new language. Would you be able to have fun if you arbitrarily picked a level and just played a year long campaign without leveling? (Assume that you level if you take a year off in character to 'train' but otherwise will not gain any sort of progression, not including wealth which would be gained depending on what you're character is doin.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I had a lot of thoughts about leveling and levels and I have the question; Do you really have to level to have fun? How levels are described and function they seem like measure of power potential rather than a real progression. Example being how you can kill a guy and suddenly know a new language. Would you be able to have fun if you arbitrarily picked a level and just played a year long campaign without leveling? (Assume that you level if you take a year off in character to 'train' but otherwise will not gain any sort of progression, not including wealth which would be gained depending on what you're character is doin.
It can work, but it is a thing that many people enjoy about games.
Personally, I like characters to change, regardless of game. That change is different from system to system, but it serves as a kind of reminder that "time" is progressing.
"Time" in this case means the passage of events within the game.
There are other games that have slower advancement, and advancement that only happens based of in-game actions. For example in Burning Wheel, if you want to learn a language, you either need to spend time having someone teach you, or you need to attempt speaking it. As you attempt/complete tasks of various difficulty, you will eventually advance. But you can't advance if you don't do things and you can't use the advancement you earn with one skill on another skill. Ie, you can't kill monsters with your sword and use that to make your languages better. You just get better with your sword.
Pathfinder is the first game where I have gone from level 1 to 15. I remember back in 1st Ed AD&D where we rolled up 15th level characters and played them. Those games didn't last long.
I guess you could play a high level game and not have to worry about monsters and such for long periods of time.
One of my favorite games that didn't have to do with levels was Champions.
|
Interestingly enough, for the past year or so I have had an interesting situation where my gaming group has been stuck at their level. They were level 10 or so, and we started Rise of the Runelords at the very beginning, so I've not given them any xp for the last year or so, waiting for them to catch up to proper challenge levels before starting to advance them again.
Haven't heard a single complaint nor has a single player quit.
It's been an interesting experience for me to say the least. Never done anything like this before.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I played in a game without levels (like CoC) or in a oneshot where I know I will not level because of the amount of time, I can have fun. Anyone who loves roleplaying should be able to have fun with any system they can understand if the GM is halfway decent.
A game that's designed with levels, like Pathfinder, just not giving us them though? I'd be upset. Gaining new powers as you advance is an integral part of the game. I'm sure I'd have fun session-to-session, but I would also have a lot of "Man, one more level and I could get major image and then I'd be able to..."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do I need to level to have fun? Hmmmmm.
I don't need to level, specifically. In a long-running campaign, I do want to see some kind of progression - be it an increase in the size of the BBEG we're fighting, or in the scope of the campaign, or in my character's personal power. Usually that means leveling whether directly or not, but I'm also quite happy for that to take some time, and for it not to be tracked via XP gain (in fact, I'd prefer not to use XP.)
I'm a bit more comfortable in d% skill-based systems where you see slight increases over time of a point here and a point there than I am with level-based systems, which always feel a bit jumpy from the abstract nature of getting all the things you've learned during that level at once.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Except of course that the average module and many GM's don't actually put you in situations where that additional +1 is actually going to show. They're mostly going to pit you against higher CR creatures with a higher AC and your chance to hit them is going to stay roughly the same. So the only people who see practical growth in many campaigns are spellcasters.
But the fact remains that you are able to go up against bigger, badder things than before. The odds of success are roughly the same, sure. But the game is more than just odds of success. Being able to take down a hill giant vs. cloud giant, for example.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
How often do people want to do anything where you just stand still?I don't find staying the same level through and adventure to be 'standing still'.
Agreed. There are other forms of reward than levels. Call me old fashioned, but I think killing the evil wizard and freeing the countryside from tyranny is reward in-and-of-itself, but there's also gold to consider.
Long term, I like leveling. It offers both the players AND the GM some variety, by presenting both with new combat options. It's not any more fun for the GM to run the same set of monsters over and over again, than it is for the players to fight them. After a while, the whole table is ready to mix things up a bit. Leveling is a good way to do that.
Having played in systems that had no leveling, or at the very least no traditional leveling (HERO, Savage Worlds kind of).
I enjoy seeing progression in my character. While I'll have a lot of fun adventuring and such, I do like to see the characters I play progress in power, prestige, and options. That said, I'm a-ok with staying at a level for long periods of adventuring and I'm not a fan of leveling too quickly. I think leveling every three sessions or less is a bit too fast for me.
But yeah, I'd like to have progression of some kind, whether it's a leveling system like Pathfinder or an XP Point System like HERO.
|
Who wants to stay a newb forever or peak when their character is barely in his "20s"? Imagine if Buffy (yes retro nerd time) stayed as a newb Slayer for 7 seasons only barely able to handle straggler vamps?
I never watched Buffy, but I doubt her character advancement had much to do with any kind of level advancement. More knowledge, more tools, but not the kind of power up that levels in Pathfinder bring.
I had a lot of thoughts about leveling and levels and I have the question; Do you really have to level to have fun?
Yes. This indeed is the essence of D&D, the idea that Gygax & Arneson had- levels. Sure, before that you'd assign a "personality" to a General or King or something.
And yes, there are "level-less" games, like those based upon Runequest, but your PC still advances and gets better.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I had a lot of thoughts about leveling and levels and I have the question; Do you really have to level to have fun? How levels are described and function they seem like measure of power potential rather than a real progression. Example being how you can kill a guy and suddenly know a new language. Would you be able to have fun if you arbitrarily picked a level and just played a year long campaign without leveling? (Assume that you level if you take a year off in character to 'train' but otherwise will not gain any sort of progression, not including wealth which would be gained depending on what you're character is doin.
It's possible. It can even be fun.
I do NOT think its feasible with a Pathfinder system though. Just the idea that there are more cool things you could do.... but never will have access too would be inherently frustrating. The idea would be to make a character, give him certain abilities and just say THERE ya go... Go have adventures now.
The Marvel Superhero game from TSR was similar to that. Whatever stats you rolled up... were the ones you retired with. You had powers, but very few upgrades.
There was a SYSTEM in place for improving abilities or getting new powers... but it was insane and the worst system EVER. You would have needed at least 2-3 adventure books to really make a dent in the xp needed to improve... so it just didn't happen.
The things needed are
A) the character is cool and effecient without upgrades.
and
B) no expectation of upgrades.
Spiderman can have the same power, strength, speed, webs for 50 years and nobody feels cheated. (Actually they get MAD when the status quo is changed :P )
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While I don't think you need to level to have fun, I think it makes sense and makes for part of the story to get better at the things you do as you go along. In fact, I think it breaks verisimilitude worse if you never improve, than if you "suddenly" get better at something. The "suddenly," to me, is reflective of your practice/experience finally paying off as something "clicks" and you're finally noticeably better at it. For example, IRL, I practiced a certain bow technique on the violin for ages once, and for weeks it felt like I just wasn't improving, or only improving very slowly; then one day, I noticed my technique was much improved--if I were a character in a game, I finally gained enough XP to buy that rank in Perform (String Instrument). In game it just works the same way--albeit in an abstract matter, in that a whole bunch of things improve at once, but I'm willing to accept that for convenience's sake--it is a game, after all, and sometimes it's just easier to abstractify certain things. But I always assume that whatever it is you advance in as you level is reflective of things you are doing in character--and in fact in my games, if you, say, for example, want to learn Dwarven on your next level, I want to hear you tell me you're reading a dwarven-Common dictionary at camp or getting the party dwarf to teach you. It just needs to be a passing sentence, it doesn't have to be deeply played out. I just want the player to be able to say at all times where his or her improved abilities come from.
If you don't like the "all at once" aspect, I think somewhere around here there's a link to Sean Reynolds' house rules on a more gradual leveling system (so as you get toward the next level, first you might raise a skill, then later, your BAB goes up, etc.). At least I think that's how it worked.
Other systems use a XP point buy system to buy up abilities one at a time (like I recall in oWoD that you earned a few XP at a time, and you used those to buy individual powers and skills rather than gaining a "level" where all those things went up at once). And those systems are cool. But I think sometimes leveling is easier (it's also easier to back-check math if you think something's wrong on your character sheet).
As for running a game with no leveling or very slow leveling, if your players are on board with it, do as you please. Despite all I've said, I'd probably be interested in such a game as long as I knew the GM was good and that the character was at least a few levels in so I could have enough room to round out skills and develop a combat style, etc.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is like arguing the strength of Superman versus other superheroes.
In any event, I still say lack of level advancement is not boring. Lack of character advancement is.
While the two can be related, they are not dependent on each other.
|
|
Indeed. The campaign I was talking about, where they've level-wise been standing still for a year now has had lots of other developments -- the adventure path they've been going through, its plot for one of course. But we've also been integrating various Ultimate Campaign things and my players have had a lot of fun with downtime activities, building a spa in Sandpoint and whatnot.
Of course it's not for everyone, but yeah, characters can certainly advance in ways other than strict numerical levels.
In any event, I still say lack of level advancement is not boring. Lack of character advancement is.
I agree with that. I like documented changes to my character, to feel like they're changing. Without reinventing the wheel, in D&D that means levels.
While I don't think you need to level to have fun, I think it makes sense and makes for part of the story to get better at the things you do as you go along. In fact, I think it breaks verisimilitude worse if you never improve, than if you "suddenly" get better at something.
I think it depends on how long the game goes on 'character wise'...and dependent on which class too.
If the whole game only goes for a couple of months 'character wise'... then going from 1 spell a day to archmage shatters verisimilitude to pieces... if it goes on for years or decades... then yeah, I want them to get better.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To each his own, of course, but personally speaking my focus in the game is on the development of my character as a person, not his powers. Take a character, throw him into the sink or swim waters of adventure, and watch him/her evolve as a person.In any event, I still say lack of level advancement is not boring. Lack of character advancement is.I agree with that. I like documented changes to my character, to feel like they're changing. Without reinventing the wheel, in D&D that means levels.
I play a lot of different RPG's. I play some that are about nothing other than a character's personality, so I totally get that. The thing is, the changes to a character in those games are still tracked on the character sheet. I can look at it and tell you when things changed and why and how.
I like having that documented change, to me that is satisfying. It doesn't matter what the change is, I just like having it and being able to document it.
Again, for D&D, the simplest form of change is leveling. You could make something else, it would just be creating your own method of documenting change. That's fine, I don't think anything is wrong with that.
Penny for My Thoughts would be an example. It's a one-shot game. Your character doesn't actually have stats, but the game play revolves around exploring 3 memories to figure out who you are. You write down a summary of each of those memories on the character sheet as you play. It's a lot of fun and I enjoy it.
Fiasco documents changes, though without a character sheet. You get the colored dice in front of you that gives you a sense of whether things are going well or poorly for your character. At the end, you roll them together and something happens from that result, ending in massive change for your character. Again, no stats or powers gained from play, just things that happen in the story.
You could try to adapt something like that to D&D, but it's a lot of work and will require a lot of trial and error. That can certainly be fun as well, but sometimes I just like to play a game and not have to reinvent the wheel while doing so. I lean much more heavily these days to just grabbing a game someone else has written that is closer to the concept that I want than trying to force D&D into being everything.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I play a lot of different RPG's. I play some that are about nothing other than a character's personality, so I totally get that. The thing is, the changes to a character in those games are still tracked on the character sheet. I can look at it and tell you when things changed and why and how.I like having that documented change, to me that is satisfying. It doesn't matter what the change is, I just like having it and being able to document it.
On the rare occasions I get to play on the other side of the screen, I like to keep a character journal for them to keep track of important events that affected them :)
It's not just a journal thing though, I like to have the change affect my character in some way. It doesn't have to be an increase in power. But I like for my character to not just be imagined different, but to feel different in play as well.
Having characters that mechanically change helps reinforce the idea that time has passed and things have happened.
I tend to just keep track of a character's development in my head, the same way I would follow character development in a weekly show or whatnot.
My brain stopped being able to track that kind of stuff ages ago :(. I'm just glad pretty much every show has at least one wiki now or I'd be forever watching reruns to remind myself of every little detail.
It's not just a journal thing though, I like to have the change affect my character in some way. It doesn't have to be an increase in power. But I like for my character to not just be imagined different, but to feel different in play as well.
Having characters that mechanically change helps reinforce the idea that time has passed and things have happened.
Oh, absolutely. I find one of the best things of all is if you can mesh the two - like combining some offscreen development as the reason why they're now able to use this new mechanic.