Level Cap

[finarvyn]

So which Appendix N character do you think is 10th Level ?

Using my scale:
4th = Hero = hero in a team
8th = Super Hero = lone hero

I see a 4th level "hero" as being the kind of guy that stories are written around, but mostly those with a group. Knights of the Round table might be 4th. Legolas and Gimil.

I see an 8th level "super hero" as being the kind of guy that stories are written around, but mostly a loner. Conan is 8th, and probably Elric. Those 8 levels might be spread over more than one class, such as Elric who is a figher/wizard.

So I can fit 6th level in between 4th and 8th to represent someone who is part of a group or team, but a clear leader. Aragorn might get the nod for 6th. Fafhrd and Gray Mouser might be 6th because they are a pair and not really a group.

I see 10th level as someone greater than 8th; someone who is more than exceptional. Someone most likely to be an NPC. Gandalf isn't really human and fits the 10th level model because he's not just "with the party" but is far beyond them.

Basically, the "in between" levels serve to give me some wiggle room if I decide that X is better than Y but not as good as Z.

Just for fun, here is a quickly thrown-together "Lord of the Rings" cast on my scale:
1 = Merry, Pippin
2 = Sam
3 = Frodo
4 = Legolas, Gimli, Boromir, Arwen (movie version)
6 = Aragorn, Elrond, Galadriel
8 = Gandalf the Grey, Saruman
10 = Gandalf the White
12 = Sauron

Anyway, this is kind of an OD&D scale and clearly changes with AD&D and later editions of the rules.

[jmucchiello]

Is there a link to the Gandalf is 5th level in AD&D article? Are you aware of the article in question?

[finarvyn]

Is there a link to the Gandalf is 5th level in AD&D article? Are you aware of the article in question?

Very familar with the article, and I found it to be a great read when it came out.

I'm not sure if the actual article is posted online anywhere, but here is a thread where I did something similar and tried to list then organize all of Gandalf's spells.

http://odd74.proboards.com/index.cgi?bo ... hread=5837

[Coffeedragon]

I think level 10 works well for the core book.

Personally I would like to see some sort of expert level book dealing with levels 11 and beyond. To me it should be a very different game, dealing mostly with planar politics, gods, demons etc.

I remember there being a picture of a character undergoing Divine Ascension in one of the early D&D manuals (Deities and Demigods or Manual of the Planes?)
Maybe that's what happens when a character reaches the giddying heights of level 10 and rather than retire, he/she decides to reach further...?

A quest or ritual to reach beyond the boundries of mere mortal men and heroes, gaining access to other realms and becoming more than human in the process? (hint hint)

[rabindranath72]

Just for fun, here is a quickly thrown-together "Lord of the Rings" cast on my scale:
1 = Merry, Pippin
2 = Sam
3 = Frodo
4 = Legolas, Gimli, Boromir, Arwen (movie version)
6 = Aragorn, Elrond, Galadriel
8 = Gandalf the Grey, Saruman
10 = Gandalf the White
12 = Sauron

Anyway, this is kind of an OD&D scale and clearly changes with AD&D and later editions of the rules.

Nice writeup, though I would probably make Elrond and Galadriel 8th level (they are definitely more powerful than Aragorn IMO.)
Just incidentally, the Nazgul (Spectres in D&D terms) are 6HD

[finarvyn]

Just for fun, here is a quickly thrown-together "Lord of the Rings" cast on my scale:
1 = Merry, Pippin
2 = Sam
3 = Frodo
4 = Legolas, Gimli, Boromir, Arwen (movie version)
6 = Aragorn, Elrond, Galadriel
8 = Gandalf the Grey, Saruman
10 = Gandalf the White
12 = Sauron

Anyway, this is kind of an OD&D scale and clearly changes with AD&D and later editions of the rules.

Nice writeup, though I would probably make Elrond and Galadriel 8th level (they are definitely more powerful than Aragorn IMO.)
Just incidentally, the Nazgul (Spectres in D&D terms) are 6HD

Yeah, you're probably right about Elrond and Galadriel. On the other hand, they did have two of the three Elven rings and those might have given the illusion that they were more powerful then they would be otherwise.

Not bad for just throwing it out there...

[jmucchiello]

I'm no Tolkien expert but Sam is probably higher level than Frodo. Sam wins more fights than Frodo.

[Ravenheart87]

I'm no Tolkien expert but Sam is probably higher level than Frodo. Sam wins more fights than Frodo.

+1, Sam is much better than Frodo.

[Coffeedragon]

I was chatting to a fellow Old Schooler today and he mentioned that the OD&D basic book only went to level 9, which was your name level and when characters got to build keeps and such.
If old school flavour is one of your goals, then maybe 9 levels would be better than 10 in the core book?

[finarvyn]

I was chatting to a fellow Old Schooler today and he mentioned that the OD&D basic book only went to level 9, which was your name level and when characters got to build keeps and such.

Well, your friend was a little confused or you are, because this doesn't actually match levels in OD&D.

Looking at OD&D, there is no single level that everything tops out at. I'm referring to Men & Magic, which is OD&D Volume I and essentially is the OD&D "Player's Handbook"

XP Charts: (page 16)
Fighter goes through level 9.
Mager-Users through level 11.
Clerics through level 8.

That probably represents what folks later called "name level."

However, looking at the Hit Dice / Spells known charts: (pages 17-18)
Fighter goes through level 10.
Magic-User through level 16.
Cleric through level 10.

The combat charts: (page 20)
The top Fighter in the chart is 16+, but the other classes are not specified. (The book says how many levels are in each to-hit column, but not the maximum level.)
The Judges Guild "Ready Ref Sheets" booklet suggests that the magic user go to 16+ and the cleric 17+, but those might not be considered "canon" to OD&D.

And the saving throw charts: (page 20)
Top Fighter in the chart is 13+
Top Magic-User in the chart is 16+
Top Cleric in the chart is 13+

Bottom line is that your friend may be suggesting a different version of the rules, but offhand I don't know what it would be. Holmes Basic goes to level 3. Moldvay/Cook Basic/Expert goes to level 14 (I think). I can't think of any edition that stops at level 9 for all classses.

So, level 10 seems just as good as level 9. Also, knowing that the range goes from 0-10 allows us to use the old "it goes to eleven" joke, which is a classic.

[rabindranath72]

Just for fun, here is a quickly thrown-together "Lord of the Rings" cast on my scale:
1 = Merry, Pippin
2 = Sam
3 = Frodo
4 = Legolas, Gimli, Boromir, Arwen (movie version)
6 = Aragorn, Elrond, Galadriel
8 = Gandalf the Grey, Saruman
10 = Gandalf the White
12 = Sauron

Anyway, this is kind of an OD&D scale and clearly changes with AD&D and later editions of the rules.

Nice writeup, though I would probably make Elrond and Galadriel 8th level (they are definitely more powerful than Aragorn IMO.)
Just incidentally, the Nazgul (Spectres in D&D terms) are 6HD

Yeah, you're probably right about Elrond and Galadriel. On the other hand, they did have two of the three Elven rings and those might have given the illusion that they were more powerful then they would be otherwise.

Not bad for just throwing it out there...

Reading the Silmarillion one gets the idea that they were powerful even before they got the Rings of Power! And don't forget that it's elves like Galadriel and Elrond who forged the rings in the first place.

When I ran a Middle-earth campaign with the Mentzer D&D rules, both Elrond and Galadriel were 10th level Elf Lords.

[jrients]

I already use a 10th level cap in my Holmes Basic based campaign. Anyone who reaches that level retires and is counted among the winners of the game.

[Jeffrey]

For example, I "killed" 16 SPAM threads yesterday and another 22 today.

Don't forget to check the bodies for treasure.

I wonder how much XP is a Russian SPAM thread worth?

[finarvyn]

When I ran a Middle-earth campaign with the Mentzer D&D rules, both Elrond and Galadriel were 10th level Elf Lords.

And I wouldn't dispute such an interpretation at all. I find that one has to be careful about level inflation, so I tend to keep things low when possible. After all, if Galadriel and Elrond are high enough level they could just challenge Sauron without having to destroy the ring at all.

In my game I try to cap good NPCs closer to 10th and evil NPCs closer to 12th. I thought Gandalf was stronger than either Elrond or Galadriel, but who knows...

[wavemotion]

I'm a big fan of lower levels in D&D - in 30 years of playing we've only been above level 10 twice. It looks (from a reading of the DCC RPG Beta only) that levels are more powerful here and I'm guessing my personal play-style will see a ton of enjoyment out of levels 1-5 and I'm not all that interested on seeing an extension above 10. In D&D when we got up over level 12 or so the game really shifted - hirelings, henchmen, strongholds, land ownership, political struggles and such replaced the everyday dungeon delving.

--
Dave Bernazzani
@rpggeek
www.rpggeek.com

[meinvt]

In thirty years of role playing I don't believe I've ever genuinely used more than about a six or seven level spread in any single campaign. Sometimes we've started a bit higher, but in general I like the idea that adventuring types are levels 1-5, by level 6 you are beginning to settle down and make your own keep, tower, guild, etc. and by level 10 you'd be at the potential peak of your profession, surpassed only by demi-gods and higher beings.

[Ducaster]

After all... If the DM is doing their job, then the odds of even getting to 5th lvl are slim

LOL While a part of me agrees to this I did find it humorous to see it right under Fin's signature from the previous post!

OK Joking aside, gotta agree with the general consensus. My best days of D&D were in the L5-10 range. After that it was a powerhack game for most alas... Still I do have one mild objection to it.

After a player gets to 9th+ level and thinks of setting up there own castle (etc) From my experience its Kinda nice to be able to PLAY that experience out for a while at least! Likewise Mages/Clerics in my old campaigns couldn't wait to make a magic item or two 'Just because they could' I assume the means for that will be at that sort of level as well.

So Might i request that some mechanic be tried to encourage PC's to retire between 9th and 12th level if they wanna keep the olde school feel of the game in general?

As an aside I am guessing 7th level spells will only be acessable at 13th/14th level if your not going to support players (or NPC's) to that level why mention 7 levels of spell in the game at all? God knows that the 6th+ level of spells in AD&D Ph were a lot of pages that hardly were needed given the way most of us actually played...

[Black Dougal]

Maybe this is the right spot for this question... because answering it may help with the level cap issue: and because I know I'm going to get asked. [if no, then sorry. please move to where it should be ]

"Can characters choose multiple classes?" Assuming that they were fortunate enough to roll stats that would even make it worth while. If "yes" then Elves and Dwarves could spend centuries becoming 10lvl in race, then 10 x INT bonus levels for Elves [5x INT bonus for Dwarves] in whatever classes catch their interest... Let Humans & Halflings multi-class in as many levels of classes as they can fit into their short lives...

After all... If the DM is doing their job, then the odds of even getting to 5th lvl are slim

On a practical note: couldn't the numbers on the MDoA charts be modified? Results ranges doubled to:
3-4, 5-6, etc., to 13-14 for all of the tables that are already written; then write out some 16+ events for each chart.

AFAIK, there will be no multiclassing or dualclassing. You are either an Elf or a Wizard, but can't be an Elf/Wizard. I am sure that the eventual unofficial "Official DCCRPG Houserules" document that several of us want to write will include some sort of multiclass option, but I believe there will be no such animal in the official rules.

[Black Dougal]

I'm a big fan of lower levels in D&D - in 30 years of playing we've only been above level 10 twice. It looks (from a reading of the DCC RPG Beta only) that levels are more powerful here and I'm guessing my personal play-style will see a ton of enjoyment out of levels 1-5 and I'm not all that interested on seeing an extension above 10. In D&D when we got up over level 12 or so the game really shifted - hirelings, henchmen, strongholds, land ownership, political struggles and such replaced the everyday dungeon delving.

--
Dave Bernazzani
@rpggeek
http://www.rpggeek.com

+1

I don't think I have ever in any D&D-like game been over 10th level. So, make those levels really cool and slow down level progression (both of which I think have already been done in the rules) and the game will be awesome with 10 levels.

I still want to run something around level 18, but that is just to see how and where the rules break at extreme levels.

[Tortog]

AFAIK, there will be no multiclassing or dualclassing. You are either an Elf or a Wizard, but can't be an Elf/Wizard. I am sure that the eventual unofficial "Official DCCRPG Houserules" document that several of us want to write will include some sort of multiclass option, but I believe there will be no such animal in the official rules.

So I gathered from reading other posts, but thanks for the direct answer.

As far as "house rules" go, I've already been making plans of my own... I love most of this new system; but I plan on house ruling the alignment system, and the "non-humans can't have classes thing" straight into the rubbish can when I run my non-beta-test games.

Personally, I think the question of "level caps" is kind of arbitrary. Whether a game system has 5,10, 20, or 100 levels is irrelevant: a cap is a cap. To my mind, a 5th level wizard under the DCC system should be equal in power with a 20th level: Gandalf doesn't change, it's the systems that describe him that are different.

[Black Dougal]

Personally, I think the question of "level caps" is kind of arbitrary. Whether a game system has 5,10, 20, or 100 levels is irrelevant: a cap is a cap. To my mind, a 5th level wizard under the DCC system should be equal in power with a 20th level: Gandalf doesn't change, it's the systems that describe him that are different.

This is a good point and something to keep in mind.

I think the issue of level caps stems from the baggage that people have from 1e AD&D through 4e. This is also where "level grinding" in games like World of Warcraft comes from. Leveling up is a metric for success. If you don't gain a level after every X number of adventures you aren't winning or you aren't making progress. It is a mechanical way to show just how cool your character is. "I just killed the mighty Red Dragon of Astragard and gained 40,000 XP. I am now 20th level." Joseph wants the successes to be more story based. It will start with "my character survived" and end with "my character lived to start a family, found a keep, and become a minor lord." In DCCRPG your character is cool because he is a grizzled veteran with amazing stories to scare the new recruits, not because he is level 25. It makes it less an exercise in mechanics and more like the Appendix N literature which is the foundation of the game.

[Tortog]

I think the issue of level caps stems from the baggage that people have from 1e AD&D through 4e. This is also where "level grinding" in games like World of Warcraft comes from. Leveling up is a metric for success. If you don't gain a level after every X number of adventures you aren't winning or you aren't making progress. It is a mechanical way to show just how cool your character is. "I just killed the mighty Red Dragon of Astragard and gained 40,000 XP. I am now 20th level."

This matches my experiences as a DM... I always thought it was less about "system-baggage" and more a reflection of the Western Cultural Paradigm. We're all conditioned from birth to strive towards a goal; whether its ours or something imposed by others, and to expect remuneration for our efforts.

Joseph wants the successes to be more story based. It will start with "my character survived" and end with "my character lived to start a family, found a keep, and become a minor lord." In DCCRPG your character is cool because he is a grizzled veteran with amazing stories to scare the new recruits, not because he is level 25.

I totally agree with this part. I've been trying to accomplish this within the D&D 3.x systems, but the rules and the need for characters to "build up" to their potential always gets in the way.

It makes it less an exercise in mechanics and more like the Appendix N literature which is the foundation of the game.

As far as Appendix N is concerned, I don't mind using it as a guide... I'd just like to see more of the authors represented. As this beta test moves forward, I'm starting to see the system less as revitalization of Appendix N and more like a tribute to Moorecock & Lieber. My favorite authors from that list are Tolkien & Saberhagen and there isn't much of their influence on the systems "flavor." The only part of Tolkien that made the "cut" were Hobbits, and they contribute to the flavor by turning themselves into luck-charm, dual-weapon fighters with a preference for armor. Certainly not Tolkien's vision of Hobbits...

I see the DCC RPG like it was a "cupcake" where the "cake" is the game engine and the "flavor" is the icing on top. I love the cake, but I'll be providing my own flavors.

[birthright]

I am a casual participant in RPGs. I only get to game every 2-3 weeks (at best). I used to play more frequently as a teenager and 20-something, but now in my 30s I have less spare time. The 10-level cap is a HUGE plus for me in the DCCRPG. One of the things I always found dissatisfying about AD&D, D&D3.5 and the other games I have played in the past is the sheer 'height' of the power curve. I 1st level PC is an absolute minnow and a 20th or (30th in D&D 4e) has power beyond absolute belief.

I'm loving the idea that 10th-level is 'Heroic' level and while powerful, characters of these levels are not invincible against a horde of orcs and aren't spending their average adventure slaying demi-gods or demon lords.

PLEASE keep the core DCC book as a 10-level game.