OK, so this article is
basically me thinking out loud (or, out written, or whatever). From time
to time my brain begins mauling over some random idea for a rules mechanic in a
game. I don’t have a specific game I want to use this mechanic in, I just look
at how a lot of games do something, and I start thinking about how I might do
it differently if I were designing a game. These ideas may end up in some
future game if I really like them. For that reason, I’m very interested in
getting other people’s feedback on these. This isn’t just an opportunity for me
to ramble or rant about the latest rules idea that wandered through my head;
it’s also a chance to get feedback from you and to further refine the idea.
The idea that came to me
today has to do with the way characters advance, mechanically speaking, in a
typical roleplaying game. There are all sorts of exceptions to this, of course,
but most of the RPGs I’ve read or played handle character advancement in one of
two ways. In either model your character earns experience points for doing
stuff. In one model you then spend your experience points to enhance your
character in specific ways. In the other model, your character “gains a level”
after earning a certain number of experience points. When they gain a level,
certain traits of theirs automatically advance, and they may gain a new trait.
I’m going to focus on the
leveling system right now, because it is probably the most popular. Let’s
consider an example, such as the Star Wars Roleplaying Game Saga Edition.
In this game, at every other level, you gain a +1 bonus to pretty much every
roll you’ll make. Since the game uses a d20 for its primary resolution
mechanic, that means that every second level, you get a +5% chance of success
on every roll. Obviously, that’s going to add up fast. Since this bonus applies
to your attack rolls, by fourth level you’ll have a 10% better chance of
hitting your opponents with a lightsaber, a blaster, or whatever your weapon of
choice happens to be. This is a pretty considerable advantage. Eventually,
there would be no point at all in rolling the attack die, because you would be
all but guaranteed success. To prevent that from happening, characters also
increase their defense scores every time they gain a level. So, even though
your average attack roll will have gone up by 2 over the course of 4 levels,
your opponents will have higher defenses to match. If this works correctly, the
odds of hitting an enemy at the same level as you, should remain pretty much static
as you advance.
This is interesting, but it
creates a bit of problems in my mind. When designing the game, I imagine that
the designers first make sure they’ve got the math right at first level. They
need to make sure that average attack rolls will match up well with average
defenses to produce the kind of odds they want for an attack hitting its
target. Once they’ve got that math worked out, they had better make sure they
get their advancement formulae correct, otherwise the odds will become skewed as
characters gain levels.
Really, when you think about
it, what is the point of this? Why have characters gain levels at all? Imagine,
for a moment, that the Star Wars RPG had no levels. All characters were
level 1. What would that mean? Your character would be level 1. Stormtroopers
would be level 1. Darth Vader would be level 1. Wait. Hold on. Darth Vader
isn’t any higher level than a stormtrooper? That’s obviously not right. Darth
Vader should obviously be more powerful than a stormtrooper. But what makes
Darth Vader stronger than a stormtrooper? If you put a blaster in Vader’s
hands, would he have any better chance of shooting Luke Skywalker than your
average stormtrooper? (Please, ignore for a moment the fact that stormtroopers
are notorious for never being able to hit anything with their blasters.) I
wouldn’t think so. Stormtroopers are highly trained soldiers, and should be
just about as good as anyone at shooting another person with a blaster. Is
Darth Vader any better at avoiding blaster fire than your average stormtrooper?
Again, I wouldn’t think so. Vader never seemed exceptionally agile. So having
Vader’s bonus to attack rolls and his defense scores way higher than a
stormtrooper’s seems like a strange idea to me.
Now, why is this idea in the
game? Because: just from watching the movies, we would expect Vader to be able
to take down a dozen stormtroopers without breaking a sweat. And, we would also
expect our heroes to gradually advance from a point where stormtroopers are a
viable threat, to a point where they could take on Darth Vader and win, just
like Luke does in the movies. The idea I’d like to propose is that an RPG be
designed so that, as characters advance, they grow out, not up. What does that
mean?
Well, what really makes Darth
Vader so much more powerful than a stormtrooper? How does Luke Skywalker
advance in power? Basically, it’s their special talents and abilities – their
connection to the force, their skill with a lightsaber, and so forth. In the Star
Wars RPG, characters also gain two things called feats and talents as they
advance. Both of these grant new powers or abilities to the character. What if
you made this the sole means of character advancement? If your character picked
up a Force blast power that allowed him to hit five or six enemies with the
Force for a single action, suddenly a squad of stormtroopers isn’t as scary. If
your character acquired a lightsaber talent that let her attack a single enemy
twice for one action, then you might begin to stand a chance against Vader.
To summarize, the basic idea
here is to get the math where you want it to be at first level, so that an
average attack roll will have the odds you want of hitting against the average
defense score. Then, don’t mess with those numbers as a character advances.
Instead, have characters acquire new abilities as they gain levels. In this
way, characters become more powerful, but you only have to get the math right
once, and the game better models what really makes Darth Vader stronger than a
stormtrooper.
What do you think? I’m not
interested in designing my own Star Wars RPG, but as a general
principle, do you think this sort of model would work well in an
action-adventure RPG? Are there any glaring flaws? Is there anything I
overlooked? I’d love to read your thoughts, but I don’t have telepathy. So,
please share them in a comment. Thanks!
I think you're right. Abilities are what truly define a character. If you want a character to be able to take a lot of hits, you could give him something to invoke, instead of raising his defense and making him impossible to hit.
ReplyDelete-T.C.
Thanks for your response! Yeah, and another thing is I find that people tend to get more excited about gaining new abilities than about adding another +1 to something.
DeleteConsidering how slowly I feel like my Star Wars character has been gaining abilities, I really like this idea. I think especially in computer rpg's it works well to place more emphasis on raising stats because in a computer game you can end up facing a really wide variety of enemies at various levels. But if you as a GM are consistently keeping the enemies we face at a level slightly above us, then like you said raising the numbers doesn't feel like it makes that much of a difference.
ReplyDeleteTo go along with the Anonymous comment, I like in games like this to try to make my abilities help define my character. I've tried to resist up until now picking an ability just because it would be awesome to have. For instance choosing Drain Knowledge, even though it's a dark side ability, as a player and character I was frustrated with how difficult it was for me to just TALK to people and get anywhere, so this seemed like a logical choice. I'd recently had success using the force to telekinetically accomplish something so I felt comfortable taking on the telekinetic savant talent and then a force power with a telekinetic tag. But I chose something that I felt was still a bit more undisciplined since it's a close blast type of attack. I really like playing this way and making choices for my character along these lines. However progression it feels has been VERY slow. When I compare my stack of abilities to everyone else's I suspect mine is the tiniest.
Not that I'm complaining or anything...I just with I could've enhanced her a little more is all...
DeleteYeah, that makes a lot of sense, and is a big part of why I think this idea could have merit. Games like this really encourage the GM to keep the enemies on par with the PCs' level, because if the enemies are much lower in level then the XP you get from them becomes negligible. But if you're raising numbers for both the PCs and the NPCs at the same rate, why bother raising the numbers at all?
DeleteOne thing that just occurred to me on the drive over is that some Force powers require higher and higher rolls which would be impossible without leveling your numbers up as well.
DeleteThe reason they use that model is so that a given Force power can effectively become more powerful as the character levels up. This makes a certain amount of sense. Luke Skywalker can obviously move a small object, like his lightsaber, using the Force before he's even had any substantial Jedi training. But it makes sense that a more experienced Jedi could move much larger objects with the same amount of ease. One way you could model this same sort of concept without having character stats increase every level is by listing new functions of a power that are unlocked based on your character's level. So, a level 1 Jedi could move a lightsaber, while a lever 10 Jedi could move a small starship, without having to scale the numbers that you're adding to rolls. Thoughts?
DeleteI think that would probably work. I definitely think there needs to be some system in place so that particular powers can get incrementally more powerful.
Delete