|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jun 6, 2016 20:04:51 GMT -6
NOTE: Split from the "Swords & Spells" threadThe bloodstone series, which is really cool, but a little out of the mainstream as it is designed for levels up to 100. Huh. This I did not realize. They really designed a series of modules to go that high?  Now I'm curious to see how they did it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jun 7, 2016 4:51:24 GMT -6
It has always been my opinion that mass combat is a big part of the fantasy genre, and the rules for it should be included in whatever the current "Base set" for D&D is... but they never are. They're always off in some odd boxed set, obscure supplement, or downloadable content. And, IMHO, they never quite really mesh with the base rules or really satisfy. An interesting viewpoint, and one that I can understand from a "completeness" narrative. For me, I had Chainmail before I had D&D and so I always felt that the mass combat rules were already in place. For me, it was more like Chainmail had only limited options for individual-scale interaction and D&D filled in the gaps. Interesting how our backgrounds cause us to see the same thing in two different ways.  |
|
randyb
Level 3 Conjurer
Posts: 92
|
Post by randyb on Jun 7, 2016 6:45:09 GMT -6
The bloodstone series, which is really cool, but a little out of the mainstream as it is designed for levels up to 100. Huh. This I did not realize. They really designed a series of modules to go that high? Now I'm curious to see how they did it. I've read them in the past. The main point of the level 100 pregens was to demonstrate that character power did not scale indefinitely (this was AD&D 1st, as I recall); the final module in the series, where those pregens were included, was actually scaled for levels 18 and up. |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jun 7, 2016 7:31:35 GMT -6
Huh. This I did not realize. They really designed a series of modules to go that high? Now I'm curious to see how they did it. I've read them in the past. The main point of the level 100 pregens was to demonstrate that character power did not scale indefinitely (this was AD&D 1st, as I recall); the final module in the series, where those pregens were included, was actually scaled for levels 18 and up. Interesting. It would be cool to see what rules they did use for scaling, since they intended some sort of capping mechanism. I wonder if this was a response to Arduin (which I believe had rules up to level 100) or some other source that caused them to feel the urge/need to create such rules. |
|
randyb
Level 3 Conjurer
Posts: 92
|
Post by randyb on Jun 8, 2016 6:52:36 GMT -6
I've read them in the past. The main point of the level 100 pregens was to demonstrate that character power did not scale indefinitely (this was AD&D 1st, as I recall); the final module in the series, where those pregens were included, was actually scaled for levels 18 and up. Interesting. It would be cool to see what rules they did use for scaling, since they intended some sort of capping mechanism. I wonder if this was a response to Arduin (which I believe had rules up to level 100) or some other source that caused them to feel the urge/need to create such rules. As I recall, they simply applied the existing rules for "x per y levels after level 20", which showed rapid diminishing returns of XP cost vs. ability increase per level. RPGNow has H1 Bloodstone Pass available; that's the opening module of the series and the showcase for Battlesystem. H4 was the concluding module; that one had the level 100 pregens as an alternative to using the same characters used for the previous modules in the series. |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jun 8, 2016 10:42:38 GMT -6
Thanks for the input. Maximum levels in OD&D have always been sort of vague for me ... I always assumed that a PC was supposed to cap out somewhere around level 10 (I liked the Warriors of Mars concept that characters top out at level 12 but John Carter could be level 13) but M&M clearly gives guidelines for how to extend the charts so Gygax had some notion that campaigns might keep going up and up. I'm pretty sure that Arduin uses some formula to extend to level 100-ish but I'm not sure that they followed the M&M sequence to get there.
AD&D caps out at level 20. 2E produced the "Higher Level Campaigns" book and 3E had "epic" up to level 30. I even recall reading somewhere that there is a (non-TSR?) module with 10th level magic-user spells. So many sources with their own ideas of how long to extend the game...
|
|
|
|
Post by Zenopus on Jun 8, 2016 11:03:53 GMT -6
Men & Magic says: "There is no theoretical limit to how high a character may progress, i.e. 20th level Lord, 20th level Wizard, etc. Distinct names have only been included for the base levels, but this does not influence progression." The highest mentioned level is 18th, for MUs. Greyhawk extends the MU chart up to 22nd.
The Warlock supplement from 1975 took the "no theoretical limit" to heart, with MU tables going up to level 40 and Cleric and Thieves to 39. Fighting Men "only" go up to 13, but that's because progression is standardized after that point. MUs gain a 10th level spell at level 40, but no lists or descriptions of these are given. IIRC, the later Complete Warlock doesn't mention the 10th level spell. Gygax spoke disparingly of the high levels of the Caltech system.
Holmes included the statement about "no theoretical limit" in Basic, but Gygax revised it downward from 20th level to "15th level fighting man, 14th levelwizard, etc."
I guess at this point he was trying to reign in expectations a bit.
AD&D doesn't have a hard cap at 20th, though. The MU spell table in the PHB goes up to 29th level.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2016 13:05:16 GMT -6
Right. No theoretical limit.
However, consider the paradigm "1 XP = 1 GP * (Monster Level/Player Level), never greater than 1. And no XP for magic items kept."
An average dragon hoard is about 62,000 GP, plus whatever you get for selling the magic items. Call it, oh, 80,000 GP total.
And of course ALL PCs are going to want a share, and your henchmen and women will too.
How many dragon lairs do you have to loot to get the 240,000 XP to get from Lord to 10th Level Lord? And once you're 13th or 14th level, you'll be getting less than 1 XP per GP even for dragons and Balrogs, and things like trolls won't even be worth looking at.
That's why there is no theoretical limit to how high a character may progress. There is a practical limit as to how much gold is out there.
|
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Jun 8, 2016 13:15:14 GMT -6
The old Arduin books took things up to 105th level.
|
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Jun 8, 2016 14:29:10 GMT -6
Interesting stuff.
I think in terms of brackets.
<1-3 minion
4-7 heroic
8-11 superheroic
Within the context of 0e I see 12 as a kind of practical limit, for gronan's reasons above, but also, from the other side of the screen, the highest HD listed in M&T is the Purple Worm: 15.
Probably just my style, but having PCs equal in HD to a Purple Worm starts to give the word "fantastic" it's other meaning.
I'm not attracted to "immortals" kind of play. Again, that's just me, and I know that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jun 8, 2016 16:00:19 GMT -6
Within the context of 0e I see 12 as a kind of practical limit, for gronan's reasons above, but also, from the other side of the screen, the highest HD listed in M&T is the Purple Worm: 15. Probably just my style, but having PCs equal in HD to a Purple Worm starts to give the word "fantastic" it's other meaning. My style as well. I like the notion that the baddest monsters are tougher than characters, which is why you need a party to take them on. I know that literature is full of individuals fighting awesome creatures, but I don't think that makes for a game the way I like to play it. |
|
|
|
Post by howandwhy99 on Jun 9, 2016 4:21:24 GMT -6
The dice mechanics in D&D in conjunction with benefits from advancing levels do eventually have a practical limit. For example, a creature cannot have a combat ability or To Hit ability at 1 or less as this is a 100% chance, an impossibility for a random game element. Starting at 20 is the balanced for 1st level creatures, 50/50. If a creature hits on a 1 or better then they have leveled in ability beyond the practical limits of the game, the spread of the possible d20 rolls.
Other practical limits come from other game mechanics. Time is obvious, but not usually run up against. Creatures have a natural death point. Player characters can only advance in a level up until their death by natural body destruction or quite unnatural body destruction (like from a sword through the chest cavity).
The game also has other limitations that stop play, but are possible to overcome via another character. Petrifaction for one. Certain baleful polymorphs. Vast aging or ability score devaluing (like all below 3).
Level advancement doesn't have a limit either, but again they are pragmatically limited to the design the dice odds can cover for the rolls defining each class's role system.
|
|
|
|
Post by scottenkainen on Jun 9, 2016 8:15:53 GMT -6
This thread got me thinking about my own high-level characters. I have played/run AD&D campaigns up to level 10 before, but I realized that I have never played OD&D up past 3rd level before.
Would I notice anything different about high-level play in an OD&D campaign, vs. AD&D?
|
|
|
|
Post by scottyg on Jun 9, 2016 9:08:39 GMT -6
At those levels, advancement may be more the result of level bumping magical effects. Gaining the experience through treasure accumulation seems unrealistic at the numbers involved in a style of playing I'm used to.
But Gary's PC Mordenkainen capped out around 28th level and Tenser, Bigby, Yrag, and Robilar all reached 20 or thereabouts. I can only remember a few bits of information Gary provided of play at that level, all involved Mordenkainen, and I think Jim Ward was DMing in each case. I can remember an encounter with "thousands" of goblins. There was a lich with a rod of absorption that Gary described offing pretty effortlessly. And on Mordenkainen's last adventure he got teleported back to the Starship Warden for another D&D Metamorphosis Alpha crossover.
|
|
|
|
Post by cooper on Jun 9, 2016 12:07:05 GMT -6
A couple of things: Gary's modus operandi seemed to be, for quasi deities deities and heroes was that multiple classes was a surer route to power than sticking with one class. If you look at most immortal powers you see someone with 15 levels of Druid, 12 levels of magic user, 8 levels of X class. Reason being, if you plot a function with the y axis as power and the X axis as levels it is not a linear curve. The slope decreases after name level or so. It's not really assassins, Druids, and monks that have level caps really. Wizards basically cap at 18, Paladins at 16, rangers at 15, fighters at 13 etc when it comes to actually adding new abilities. The OSR desire for a "uniform" level cap is perhaps not entirely helpful. Between the different XP costs and accounting for things like 9 spell levels that don't map perfectly with, say, various monk abilities, the desire for the uniformity of a level cap OSR game can be seen as a 3e-ism, beginning, perhaps with 2e that set an arbitrary (but symbolic d20) cap of 20th level, but ultimately comes across as a type of obsessive compulsiveness like the plotting of the linear +1 BAB for fighters. That being said. Bloodstone pass basically capped characters abilities and then allowed for continued (linear) growth of hit points. Fighter abilities capped at 17th level (best thac0. Wizard spells at 29th (although duration and range continued to increase). So a 100th level fighter, to borrow from the text, had an advantage of hit points and stats but little else. Bloodstone assumed characters would have stats from 18-25 generally, primarily due to magic items and wishes and such. Bloodstone also assumed dual classing as well. How did bloodstone challenge characters? If you look at H4, orcus' realm is vastly more challenging for the player, then the character. The number of puzzles daunts any other module I've seen. How do you challenge a 100th level wizard? Make a puzzle for the player  As to character life. Fascinating for me, is the manual of the planes and the different time dilations. Specifically mentioned is that wizards would want to conduct research or item creation in places like the ethereal where time is 10x slower. Especially in a long campaign, being able to create a magic sword in 1.2 months instead of a year might not seem like a big deal in the short term, but played out over a campaign can add up to decades of saved time. |
|
The bloodstone series, which is really cool, but a little out of the mainstream as it is designed for levels up to 100.Huh. This I did not realize. They really designed a series of modules to go that high? 
