>level up>monsters level up with youWTF is the point?
Presumably you leveling up is not just your numbers going up but a way to unlock new features and options. Monsters levelling up with you are a way for you to test those new options.
>>98708669That's what I've been saying. The stakes should rise, and characters should get access to new resources and allies, but frankly any game should be mechanically interesting from session 1 and not rely on promising to become cool and exciting later.
>>98708669
>>98708669What's wrong with enemies being equal or lower in power than you with the occasional powerful opponent you need to outsmart to defeat rather than just destroy with raw strength?
>>98708669One of the primary causes of D&D 5e being a mess is designing the math to make this less obliged, and even it and 4e have significant dynamic changes between level ranges as >>98708708 mentions.>>98708718The stakes rising does run into logistical issues for high-level campaigns, which is one of the ways WotC keeps screwing up. Since players get HD+Con every level, monster damage has to scale accordingly, and thus so does minion HP, and since many minion mechanics draw from existing monsters you've got to re-scale all the monsters up, and so the players' damage has to scale, and now basic existence at high levels requires +numbers that can chew through dozens if not hundreds of noticeably trained soldiers in an organized battle so anything "normal" is essentially irrelevant in combat.Bounded Accuracy merely reduces the pace of this by delaying the to-hit vs. AC part, but it's still very much a Big Thing and without flat-value DR you can't have functional immunity to "normal" dudes with swords while taking respectable damage from a well-juiced but not specifically prepared Fighter.
>>98708669play something without levels
>>98708669How about...>Welcome to Session One!>The average encounter level will increase in two sessions' time.>Prepare yourselves, or don't.
>>98708838I was considering a change in D&D leveling where there is no (or at least, less) HP bloat to keep the game more dangerous, if not lethal, to avoid HP sponges without making it rocket tag, but it would probably need to be tuned according to party composition and all that.You have PCs getting more competent with higher base attack modifiers, somewhat higher damage and higher saves, but the reduced health pool would still keep them on their toes when facing weaker stuff. Like you can be very competent in cyberpunk, but a random thug with a pistol is still a threat if you're not going around armored from head to toe.
>>98710579>I was considering a change in D&D leveling where there is no (or at least, less) HP bloatThat's just how it was pre-3e. You didn't always get a HD, and only sometimes would add your Constitution modifier to HP (which didn't always align with a HD, especially at high levels), which was a smaller value on its own table to boot.Regularized score-modifier relationships and HD-level associations and such may be helpful for certain aspects of the learning curve and formatting, but 3.X dumping a fucking mountain of character options impacting the core game math thoroughly overwhelmed those benefits while leaving the scaling irreparably warped for any attempt at restoring scale via Domain play.
>>98710797>That's just how it was pre-3eI have no memory of this, my exposure to those editions was as a dumb kid that just got together with friends to throw dice and be swept away by the magic at the table. By the time I grew up I was playing 3.5, cyberpunk and all manners of systems after. But, if there's already a framework in place, I can use it as reference. Thanks for the tip anon.
>>98708777OPs issue is not unique to your gay little boogeyman
>>98708669The monsters you fight don't level up (short of being left alone long enough for a training arc or their evil plan to bear fruit, gay rights and liches and all). You are sent to fight stronger monsters. You CAN hunt down that goblin straggler from two months ago and he'll still be a goblin, but what would you get out of it? The nation's cavalry is asking you to de-nest the griffons attacking the premiere horse breeding ranch, this is an opportunity for political clout and maybe a griffon egg to eat, sell, or raise.
>>98708777OP's premise doesn't apply to D&D.
>>98708669You're so close to getting it, lol
>>98710908jesus christ how do people play this boring garbage. THIS is the dominant market share product? lmao
>>98711585D&D doesn't level up individual monster but whole encounters (via CR scaling)
>>98710579>>98710832NTA, but from what I recall it's that classes stopped getting extra HD at higher levels. Along with the Constitution bonus being capped or otherwise limited. At lower levels that would only be a slight difference, but at a certain point you've got characters that flatten out in terms of HP gains. It would be entirely possible to build a game around even less scaling than that. Easy example, make the HP equal to Constitution score + level. The party will mostly start with 10+ HP and end somewhere around 30-40. Pretty consistent range, still dead to a few solid hits. The starting HP being slightly better can also help avoid rocket tag early on, and as long as the damage bonuses aren't increasing faster than HP, then it'll stay that way.
>>98713141This is useful, thanks anon. I was also wondering if some form of damage reduction tied to CON could help, but that would defeat the point of reducing HP because you would be even more impervious to low level enemies. Unless I do some convoluted shit like making it a "heroic resistance" that applies to higher level enemies. Maybe some sort of reaction after taking a hit, so you can choose when to apply it, like legendary monsters do with failed saves? So you can risk it and take that dagger from a low level mook, but the big guy with the halberd closing in is a much greater risk of one shotting you.
>>98708669You can't win the arm's race. The trick is to figure out how to sidestep it.That's exactly how wizards make GMs all over the world seethe like crazy.
>>98708669One of the fun things I did toward the end of my last campaign was to take one of the traumatising near-TPK early encounters, triple the number of enemies, and watch them steamroll it
>>98708669The problem with everything level up with you is you don't feel any progress outside of new moves, spells, etc. It's better to make the threats grow with you however you don't just stay in the same place. Hints the idea of a starter town being low level only or at the very least once you do get into the higher levels. You're going on specialized quests over the rats, goblins, and slimes change colors and are now just a level or two behind you. I would always suggest starting level face the classic oversized rats in the ruins and sewers. Then go to goblins and boars before move on to wolves and human bandits. Having the last quests before moving to the a new town being maybe bears and orcs.
>>98710405>print out a huge map of the campaign world>put a giant monster miniature on it>move it slightly closer to wherever the PCs live evey session
>>98708669ideally the threats should be of higher level as you're able to do more difficult stuff dangerous, if you keep fighting rats but now they're level 7 rats then that's a problem
>>98708669My pet peeve is when the GM levels up skill checks with us. You're telling me the same lock I picked at level 1 is just as difficult to open now that I'm level 7? Fuck out of here.
>>98708669>monsters level up with you>have fun anyway
>>98713801desu that's usually a result of the GM misreading the rules and thinking that just because the PCs are Level X then all their challenges should be Level X.No, the world doesn't level up dynamically. Some challenges stay at level 1 even when you're come back at level 7 and some challenges are level 10 even when you stumble into them at level 3. The level scaling is meant to be for determining relative difficulty, not absolute difficulty.
>>98712410You have have monster advancement in 3.5e and you can even add class levels and some specific classes are for monsters only
As a dm I do a combination of this>>98714084And this>>98710405Not verbatim but close enough
>>98708777He's clearly referring to pf2 tho
>>98713801Why are you picking the same lock you already picked?
>>98715177Why is the fighter swinging the same sword he already hit with before?Why is the wizard casting the same spell he already used?Practice makes prefect.
>>98715206Wrong. Once a lock has been picked, it is unlocked permanently and can never be picked again. Don't argue.
>>98710862>>98711585uh oh, melty!
>>98715218we both know that's not in the rulebook
>>98715234Mald bitch :)
>>98714197>You have have monster advancement in 3.5eThat almost no one used.
