Time for a Gaming Poll! [gaming]

[the_gneech]

This is a question for my players. Other people are welcome to vote if you like, but your answers aren't likely to have much weight in my analysis. ;) Since the compostion of the gaming group is evolving, I like to get a feel for the group's opinion.

Levelling up in "the old days" of D&D used to take forever ... getting to 5th level took years, getting to 12th level took decades. With the advent of D&D 3.x, they deliberately sped up levelling to get you to "the good stuff" (e.g., beholders, adult dragons) sooner. The average first-level adventurer is half-way to second at the end of the first session, for instance.

The problem with that is, in D&D particular it gets hard to get into your character because they rapidly go from zero to demigod without a pause to breathe ... and for the GM it becomes a kind of arms race, constantly coming up with new, bigger challenges to fight the tricked-out heroes. I have several scenarios I had in mind for my main campaign that the characters have "levelled past" -- I can still run them, but I will have to pump up the opposition if it's going to be a challenge.

On the other hand, I kind of like the fact that faster-levelling means you don't end up fighting the same kobolds, goblins, and dire rats over and over again forever. I recently used my first mind flayer ever, and expect soon to use some even bigger, badder nasties. And from the point of view of a player, I have so many characters that I want to play, that I like the idea of campaigns having "rapid turnover."

So the question is, what do you think about this issue?

[Poll #724735]

-The Gneech

Comments

[katayamma.livejournal.com]

Although the new 3.x rules for fast advancement are nice, I think they need to be tailored more to a curve where the first few levels are relatively quick, but advancement slows down. In real life, you can pick up the basics of most anything fairly quickly (representing levels 1-5). After that, it takes time to refine your skills and truly master whatever you're learning. Although D&D does have some of that curve built in, I do think it's a bit shallow.

The other thing that I note is that many campaigns are very "kill" oriented. Now don't get me wrong, when I'm playing DND I usually am in the mood to hack and slash. Unfortunately, games where it's all hack and slash tend to quickly get boring. At the same time, if you're questing all the time, it gets pretty boring as well because you end up spending time on individual players and side tasks they're doing, making everyone else wait.

The one thing most DM's I've played with don't do is give much of a meaningful "completion" bonus to a campaign/quest, which doesn't encourage the players to look for more than just find something to kill. Minor side quest XP is the hallmark of MMORPGS and a very good way to round out your campaign, allow characters to level on more than just beating up every poor mob that comes its way, and may actually lead to *gasp* good roll playing!

Anyway, that's my 2 copper.

[the-gneech.livejournal.com]

The one thing most DM's I've played with don't do is give much of a meaningful "completion" bonus to a campaign/quest, which doesn't encourage the players to look for more than just find something to kill.

I've been thinking about that with D&D, actually. Since my players seem to be so keen on plot anyway, maybe I should start award XP based on "plot point completion" and toss out the "encounter level" model. I'll have to ponder this.

-The Gneech

[katayamma.livejournal.com]

You don't necessarily have to toss out the encouter level system since you'll still have encounters. It's just that encounters won't have to dominate the experience pool anymore.

In City of Heros, they use "contacts" and your relationship to your contact is based on how much work you do for him. Each contact is a complete story arc unto itself which may or may not affect events that happen to your character later. Each mission (or errand as the case is sometimes) your character completes, there's a mission bonus in addition to any you pick up in the mission. At the end of the story arc, there's usually a large end-of-arc bonus that's about 3x what a normal mission ending gives.

You might consider something like that. :)

Cheers

[laurie-robey.livejournal.com]

I used to be of the variety of player that likes to have one character that they really get into and have an elaborate background and thoroughly explore their personality. I still like to have some kind of background and development of character, but not as much anymore. I don't get as "into" my characters as I used to (which is probably a good thing, but that's another discussion entirely), consequently, I don't want to hang on to a character for years on end unless they're a character that happens to catch my fancy.

[jamesbarrett.livejournal.com]

Kyriela is the only one I want to hjang on to for years on end and play out everything there is to how she becomes a powerful wizard and all that. Otherwise, I just want to play and have some fun. -Frisk

[copperwolf.livejournal.com]

Sounds like you just need to find a happy medium.

[katayamma.livejournal.com]

Only if he's trying to talk to the dead... and even then a good necromancer would probably work better.

[hantamouse.livejournal.com]

I would opt for a faster progression, at least at first, if only because I've never been in a game long enough to make any higher level.

[the-gneech.livejournal.com]

Well, in d20 terms, the Star Hero game was probably comparable to 12-15th level by the end, if that counts...

-The Gneech

[jamesbarrett.livejournal.com]

I want to take one character at least (Preferably Kyriela) to 20th level and possibily beyond at least once. -Frisk

[stilghar.livejournal.com]

I feel your pain. I haven't done *any* gaming outside of a computer since spring of '00. :(

[vlad-badger.livejournal.com]

Progression Speed

in most of the games i have played (D&D and others) the DM/GM gave out levels when we did something of great impact or had a life changing RP happen to our characters. over a two year Campaign our characters went for level one to 20.

[fferret.livejournal.com]

Well, as it's a new character and a new campaign, I'm all for development. I'll admit that levelling up has been tough in the past under the old rules, but I can't see that our current party is doing that bady, or going that quickly. If it's a concern for you, you could always adjust the number of goblins we run into...(*grins, chuckling*)