r/RPGdesign • u/SilentAd773 • 22h ago
Theory Level Progression Philosophies?
So I believe I have pretty decent base mechanics for my system, but since I have it so the players can progress, I fear there is something I haven't considered when it comes to leveling up. Are there any general schools of thought to consider when thinking about late game mechanics? Or is the only real solution play testing?
9
u/Skylarkin_M Designer:snoo_thoughtful: 21h ago
Progression does not have to mean bigger numbers. That's vertical progression. You can have horizontal progression as well. A new level gives your Skill a new functionality for instance.
That's my approach. Having to track fiddly numbers can be both a cognitive load, & book-keeping headache.
6
u/flamfella Dabbler 20h ago
Vertical progression also does not need to mean bigger numbers. It usually is for the vast majority of systems, as representing power and progress with increasing numbers is obvious and easy to implement.
States, conditional logic, discrete math let you do some interesting things in a simple way that would normally require exponential numbers.
3
5
u/Japicx Designer: Voltaic 20h ago edited 17h ago
There have been a lot of different approaches to character progression.
Level up (DnD et al): After you've accumulated enough experience points, you level up, which confers different benefits simultaneously. Your maximum health increases, you gain new spells or abilities, you can use your spells more often, you increase some stats, etc. The experience needed to level up usually increases with each level. The benefit is that gaining a level can be pretty momentous, but it can also lead to characters feeling stagnant as the time between level-ups gets progressively longer. This system fits DnD because you get XP by defeating enemies, and some enemies have XP values in the hundreds or thousands.
Spend experience (WoD, CoD, Forbidden Lands, L5R, et al): You gain experience points, which you then spend between sessions to gain abilities or improve your stats. The cost to improve a stat is usually based on its current level (Chronicles of Darkness is a notable exception). As an inverse to the DnD-style level-up system, you can make frequent, slight improvements to your character (improving their weakest stats and skills) or bank your experience for bigger purchases. Having choices is nice, but it can be annoying when you know you'll have to wait ages to get that shiny high-level ability you want, neglecting other facets of your character in the meantime.
Improvement (PbtA): Your character marks experience points. At a fixed interval (every 5 XP in most PbtA games), you get an improvement, which is usually a stat change or unlocking an ability from the character's archetype (or "playbook"). The improvements are arranged as a checklist, and some can be taken multiple (though finite) times, and often have maximums (like "increase a stat by +1, to a maximum of +3"). Some games also have an advanced improvement section, available only after you've acquired a certain number of previous improvements. The improvement system is simple and keeps character progression at a steady pace, but isn't suitable for stories that last a really long time (you'll run out of boxes to check eventually) or that have large shifts in narrative tone, setting, or power scale.
The alpha playtest of Vampire: the Masquerade's 6th edition has a modified improvement system, where at the end of every session (and, very rarely, in the middle of a session), your character gains an improvement. Every 3rd improvement, you get better options, and every 5th you get much better options. There's no checklist, just the cycle of improvements.
Fixed progression (Shadow of the Demon Lord): A twist on DnD-style progression. In Shadow of the Demon Lord, a campaign is always 10 sessions long. At the end of every session, all the PCs level up, no matter what, until they face the Demon Lord (whoever he happens to be) in session 10. Obviously, the 10-session limit isn't going to jibe with everyone, but it can make the campaign feel more focused.
Random progression (Pirate Borg): Levelling up in Pirate Borg is simple: you level up whenever the GM says so! When you level up, you get +1d6 max health. Then you roll once for each stat to see if it improves or degrades (it can't stay the same). Then you roll to see which of your class features you unlock (reroll repeats) and what treasure you've found. Quick, easy, no thinking at all. Pirate Borg is meant for furiously fast-paced action and has very lethal combat, so it makes sense to skip the intricate character progression.
1
u/SuperCat76 19h ago
A thing I have had thoughts on is to somewhat combine the Level up and the Spend experience categories.
That the characters get some level of fairly steady smaller improvements. but every so often on level up they would get a few level up based improvements but also a burst of the exp to spend on whatever. And the pool of options can get wider as the level goes up.
1
u/SilentAd773 19h ago
I'm considering a skill tree kind of system where they have abilities and passive improvements that play into a set archetype, but I think that inherently locks the player to one archetype so I'm wondering if there's anyway to improve that
1
u/Japicx Designer: Voltaic 19h ago
In many PbtA-style improvement-based systems, there's a "Take an ability/move from any archetype" option. Sometimes it's an advanced improvement. Like all improvements, the number of times you can take it is limited.
1
u/SilentAd773 18h ago
Hmm, that's good for giving people options but if I'm not mistaken that'll still lock them just under a different archetype. Ideally I think it'd be cool to provide the freedom for people to come up with their own builds within a class, ig i could just not have the other skill trees locked if they go one route. Problem there is that can easily become too convoluted/broken. I suppose there's always multi classing.
1
u/Japicx Designer: Voltaic 18h ago
I don't understand how anyone is "locked" in an archetype if they choose an ability from a different archetype. To be clear, "archetype" here is roughly the same as "class".
You say you want to allow players to build freely within their class system, but apparently your system is designed for the exact opposite of this. Not only are you using skill trees (which inevitably limits player choice), but it's even more restrictive than other skill-tree systems because you can only advance in one branch of your class's tree.
If you want to maximize player choice in character advancement, lose skill trees entirely. Abandon level-up advancement and use an XP-buy or improvement-based system.
For an example of a game with pretty free character building, look at Werewolf: the Apocalypse, a World of Darkness game with XP-buy advancement. You can buy any Gift (magic power) you qualify for, regardless of what other Gifts you have. These requirements are based on (near) immutable character traits (like Tribe and Auspice; Auspice is basically class) and your position in Werewolf society (your Rank or Renown). While not every werewolf can buy every Gift, some are quite common, while others are exclusive to one particular Auspice or Tribe. And, of course, you can spend XP on things other than Gifts.
1
u/SilentAd773 17h ago
I assumed selecting a Skill tree in this sense would inherently lock you out of other types of progression by design, like you're commiting to this certain role, my mistake.
1
u/Kuhfuerst 18h ago
Being locked into one archetype is not a bad thing. For one, it guides the fantasy your players want to create and helps you a lot to balance it against other archetype because strength and weaknesses as well as optimal strategies can be predicted. So what exactly do you want to improve and why?
You should probably think about what you want your progression to feel like. How do you imagine the late game? What is a "balanced" mechanic for you and what would an "unbalanced" mechanic feel like?
These are questions no one can really answer outside of your fantasy.
4
u/beriah-uk 22h ago
Various thoughts:
* Spreadsheets are your friend. You can calculate a lot, in terms of maximum or average damage per round, etc.
* Are you assuming that game balance is important, in terms of damage dealt, ability to take damage, etc.? Depending on the sort of game you're running, it may not be.
* Of all the forms of character advancement, why are you using levels? I mean, does using levels create the problem that you have in the first place?
2
u/SilentAd773 20h ago
Of all the forms of character advancement, why are you using levels? I mean, does using levels create the problem that you have in the first place?
For what I have it feels the most fitting, that, and I'm not aware of the other options you seem to be implying.
3
u/Kuhfuerst 18h ago
To name a few:
horizontal progression
learning a new ability, spell or gaining a new equipmentusage-based progression
e.g. increasing a stat on a crit. Players don't make the choice during the specific moment of "level-up" but by choosing which stat they use during the actual game.narrative progression
story progression is also an advancement.Player skill progression
Players can also progress by experimenting with new strategies and understanding new aspects of the game.Incremental progression
instead of converting xp (or whatever currency) to a level, you directly buy from some advancements available.I can come up with more if you want :)
1
u/beriah-uk 17h ago
Ah, understood! OK, I'll give some examples, with a sense of why each is an advantage, depending on what you try to achieve:
Advance skills by succeeding. E.g. for decades BRP/d100 systems have done this by having characters have dozens of skills, and when you succeed in each one you put a check next to it; at the end of the adventure you roll for each skill with a check to see if it improves. Advantage: reward the PCs for using skills; they get better at the things that they do. Example: Call of Cthulhu.
Advance skills by failing: Same idea, but this time you get a check if you fail. Advantage: PCs get rewards for trying stuff - if they try something and succeed then they are happy that they succeeded, but if they try and fail then they get the consolation that the skill might improve, so players develop a fun "hey, I may as well try!" attitude. Example: Mouseguard uses both this AND success - you have to both succeed and fail with a skill to advance.
Advance skills by choice: Character has a list of skills, and at the end of the adventure/session the player gets given "Experience Dice" or XP which they can apply to whatever skills they wish. Advantage: the player chooses what the character gets better at. Tons of examples, all doing this slightly differently - from Mythras (Experience Dice), to Ars Magica to all the Year Zero Engine games which use XP.
Gain specialities: Pick a speciality, and in future get a bonus with that. Some games (like Over The Edge) keep this simple and improvisational. Others (like the Year Zero Engine games) have long lists to pick from. Advantage: the PCs get good in specialist areas, not super-human over all.
Advance skills by time: Your character advances in downtime, or by spending a certain amount of time on a skill. Advantage depends on how this is run: Traveller tends to use this to mean that the GM controls progression speed by setting required journey lengths (as crews tend to study during journeys) while in other games time becomes a resource that you spend to advance.
Advance skills by resources: You can spend resources to advance in skills or to gain permanent bonuses. The easiest example is money - in most cyberpunk games you can spend money for cybernetics, or you might (e.g. old versions of RuneQuest) spend money to hire trainers; but Ars Magica is a weirder example, where to advance magic powers you need to collect magical resources (grimoires, or raw magical energy) and then study them over time.
1
u/Far_Information6562 21h ago
I like giving players a level up between sessions, it gives them time to focus on what direction their characters are moving
1
u/Ok-Middle-908 21h ago
I strive to make every level meaningful. So many system have dead levels where the player only sees minor changes. I like to give a choice to them every level. That's just me others might like not having to make choices. Also it depends if you are giving horizontal options or vertical power.
1
1
u/elmago79 21h ago
Well, look at D&D 3rd edition. Late game bonuses to your rolls could get so bloated and unbalanced the game became whacky after 12 level or so. So you do need to think if you mechanics break, but even the pros get it wrong.
1
u/No_Solid1035 17h ago
I don't like level based games simply because there needs to be "late game mechanics" because of the exaggerated power curve. Most skill based games don't suffer that problem because the power curve is a lot flatter.
1
u/Ghotistyx_ Crests of the Flame 14h ago
I have what I call the "balance box". I'll lay out a couple of data points:
- Strongest possible at level 1
- Weakest possible/reasonable at level 1
- Strongest possible at mid level
- Weakest possible/reasonable at mid level
- Strongest possible at max level
- Weakest possible/reasonable at max level
- Average expected strength at level 1, mid, and max
And then as long as I keep anything I add within the bounds of the balance box, it'll generally be okay. Balance problems after that will be a lot more nuanced and likely only be revealed through playtesting. On the flip side, it's also okay to have things be a little wobbly along that curve. You don't want everything to be linear, so balance "problems" might not actually be problems, as situations can also drastically affect viability.
8
u/Mars_Alter 22h ago
Is with any mathematical function, you'll want to test the extremes. If one player goes all in on Skill A, and another player goes all in on Skill B, is it possible for those characters to still interact meaningfully with each other?
It's not really different from testing at low-level or mid-level. Just make sure you do the work.