Apprentice Levels

One thing that D&D Next seems to be doing is adding the concept of the apprenticeship tier to the early development of a character.  This topic dovetails nicely into a bit more detailed post I had on Levels.  From the D&D Next article:

Is the Apprentice Tier designed with multiclassing in mind?

Not especially, in the sense that it isn’t the primary driver of the proposed tiering system. The primary driver of that design is the goal of streamlining the entry into a class so that new players (both to the game, and to that class) can start simply and ease into greater complexity. By spreading class features along a few (short) levels, this gives the player time to thoroughly learn a feature before moving on to a new one. Of course, there are a lot of other benefits to the approach—including making dipping into a class less appealing in an a la carte multiclassing system—but that also includes making character creation faster at that level, as well as highlighting what I would call essential class features that define a class, and then gradually introducing more texture.

I definitely see the beginning of Lost Worlds looking like an apprentice tier of play.  Whereas the designers of D&D next discuss the reason for it as a way of making the game more approachable to new players, I think it does also help solve the multi-class play-balance issues pretty nicely.  Since I’m packing 20 levels into the span of 10 levels of traditional D&D, it makes sense for me to make the first several levels of play feel more like the “apprentice tier” where you don’t have much coin and you don’t have uber-skills compared to the average city guard.  Yet.

Of course, just like in standard D&D, you could always decide to play a game with established heroes, and start at a higher level and with some starting gear.   Sure, you “miss out” on some of the content of the game, but as a group, presumably you’ve all agreed you wanted to miss out on that content so you could skip directly to the content you like the best.  In theory, the game could support a progression table that moved you through a group’s favorite tier more slowly, or provided more levels and content within that tier, but since I’m already moving the game to apprentice->gritty->heroic instead of heroic->superhero->demi-god, I’m not too worried about not having “enough” levels of content in the tier I want to play in.

Since I think level-ups in lost worlds will be more common (one every 1-2 sessions), that gives us approx 20-30 sessions of play for an entire campaign.  Comparing that to my current Pathfinder game, the group is between level 8 and level 10, and we’ve been playing for 18 months, every other week (so approx 36 play sessions).  It seems as though Pathfinder, on the standard progression, is looking at approx. 100 play sessions of content to move through from start to finish.  To be clear, this isn’t a failing of Pathfinder, I can of course give more or less experience, or change the level progressions to move the game at any speed I want.  It’s more of a look at the assumed standard of the game.  I think for Lost Worlds, I’ll end up with an assumed standard that is significantly more condensed than 100 play sessions.

One game philosophy I have, that this discussion highlights, is that I’m more interested in playing shorter and more-varied campaigns.  I like the development of an ongoing story and characters as much as anyone, but I think I want to taste a little bit more of the diversity that can exist in the RPG genre than playing the same ongoing storyline for 3 years.  At the same time, I don’t want to ruin the momentum of a single game by alternating too much.

Back to the main topic.  I envision Lost Worlds having the following tiers:

1-5: Apprentice Tier

6-10: Gritty Tier

11-15: Hero Tier

16-20: Champion Tier

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “Apprentice Levels

  1. Andy

    I agree about shorter campaigns too. I LOVE the idea of a prolonged campaign compared to individual adventures loosely tied together, but at the same time I agree that sometimes it sounds nice to see a different part of the world or try out a different character.

    Might be good for a seperate post, but one of the things that is cool about GR Martin, Betrayal at Krondor, etc is that you are participating in one story (campaign) with multiple protagonists. What would you think of a game where each player had a few different PCs. Sometimes these PCs would interact, split up, or reform. Say the adventure starts as – group 1: fighter, wizard, archer, druid. Group 2: Paladin, cleric, rogue, witch. However, at one point in the story the groups meet up and split up in a different configuration based on their personal objectives. Maybe rogue dies and is replaced by someone else from the campaign world.

    I think this would accomplish a few things: (1) gets everyone used to role-playing vs. “my character has the exact same personality as me,” (2) gets everyone used to dying (as any one death is less significant since you have other characters, (3) allows everyone to see a variety of different classes, races, locations, (4) quickly fleshes out the campaign world. Downside – I have no idea how to write an adventure that could take advantage of a concept like that!

    But I do think it would be cool, especially in a new rules system. Allows us to quickly playtest a variety of classes while still playing the “same campaign.”

    Reply
  2. Pingback: The Three Pillars | Lost Worlds

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s