Advancement Systems In RPG Design

Image result for leveling meme

For more of my cool D&D ideas, check out my Hoard of House Rules! Just shy of a dollar. 

I recently had a fun conversation with a friend of mine who is designing a tabletop RPG about what kind of advancement system to use for his game. It got me thinking about the pros and cons of all of the various methods games use for character advancement, mostly in tabletop but also drawing from video games. I thought I would lay out the various options as I saw them and discuss each in turn, both as a way to organize my thoughts a bit further and also to show the wide variety of methods there are out there.

How you use an advancement system for your game is a core question both for game designers and also for those running games. Many advancement systems leave a lot of flexibility based on play style – one D&D game for example might have characters leveling every four or five sessions of play, and another might have them leveling every session. One is a story of slow development where there have to be a lot of rewards that aren’t experience points while the other is a roller-coaster ride to power that won’t leave as much time for character development, since everyone will always be learning and trying out their new abilities. Designers should let GMs know where they think the “sweet spot” is for their game, as this can be a very helpful guide. Trial-and-error also works, but can lead to a lot more frustration among players.

Experience and Leveling (D&D)

Of course, the granddaddy system, the default in most people’s minds, is leveling. You accumulate experiences points doing whatever it is that the game wants to reward, and when you hit a particular break-point you have a sudden increase in your character’s abilities. This is true of many RPGs whether on console or tabletop, and was the method introduced by D&D and many of the very first tabletop RPGs forty years ago.

The important thing here is that the game gives experience points for what you want players and characters to be doing most often. In fact, if you want to know what a game is about, look to what it rewards – and if your game rewards something that you don’t want your game to be about, change your experience system. (This is true for all of the advancement methods I’ll discuss, and also true for any reward system or cycle you have in your game, period.) Reward the behavior you want. Don’t give experience points for killing monsters in your supposed political intrigue game.

You also want to have your level progression lean toward incremental and not be too jarring. Unless it is an intentional aspect of your game, a character shouldn’t be twice as capable after achieving a single level. Not only is it ‘unrealistic’, it is jarring to the fiction. Suddenly, things that were dire threats to you last session are a breeze now because you crossed an arbitrary threshold. Thing through how often you think characters should level – multiple times per session? Every two or three sessions? Every month of play? Etc. And tune your game accordingly.

Incremental Leveling (D&D 4E, D&D Online)

Kind of a subset to the above is something I really liked about Dungeon & Dragons Online, and how it used leveling to make the experience of play more similar to other MMOs (where there tend to be 100 or so levels, each only slightly different from the others). I’ve written about it here in the past, but in brief, DDO took each level in D&D and broke it into 10 mini-levels that were incremental points between. So, for example, instead of being 10% more likely to hit an enemy, you would be 1% more likely at each increment. Instead of 10 hit points, you would get 1. Ten of those increments would add up to a full level that one might recognize from the tabletop version of D&D.

D&D 4th Edition did something similar by making the three tiers of play explicit. First the Heroic tier, from level 1 to 10, then the Paragon tier from 11 to 20, and then the Epic tier from 21 to 30. At each tier different abilities became available, and it was intentional that there be a bigger difference between 10 and 11 than between 9 and 10 for example.

Advancement through Failure (Powered by the Apocalypse games)

When thinking of earning experience or character points or whatever it is that makes a character advance, we often think of achievement. Starting with Apocalypse World, there have been a series of games that root advancement in failure. Generally speaking, in games based on AW, you mark experience or gain experience when you fail in a roll. This is in part so that you can ‘fail forward’, so to speak, and I’ve also found it to be an encouraging aspect of these systems for people who feel like they don’t roll well. It’s also fun to crap out on an important roll, knowing it’ll hurt, but sit back and say, “You know, I learned something today…”

This is really just an example of another type of behavior  you want to reward – specifically, the behavior of taking risks in-game and using abilities you aren’t very good at. However many abilities a game might have, a given character will usually only use maybe a half dozen of them regularly. Characters tend to be specialists in RPGs, and players tend to want their characters to succeed, meaning players will want to only try things their characters are good at. This is doubly true if they only get experience points, or only move toward advancement, when they succeed. Actively rewarding failure is a good way to encourage players to have their characters try new, dangerous, and often entertaining things.

Edit: It was pointed out, correctly, that it is specifically Dungeon World that grants xp for failure, not Apocalypse World.

Ongoing Point-Buy (GURPS, WoD)

Leaving aside “leveling” altogether, there is the system where experience points are points that one can spend to improve specific abilities. This system is easier to customize, and can be less jarring. When a character levels, they often increase a number of different abilities and capacities, but with a point-buy or character point advancement system, the player can choose to improve some abilities and not others.

Often the choice for the player is whether to spend advancement points frequently on minor new abilities, or to save up the advancement points to buy more powerful abilities. In all World of Darkness games, as well as in GURPS, players are presented with this decision at the end of each session. Some players will want to advance a little bit each session, while others will save up for big abilities. Many will alternate between the two based on how they want their characters to develop.

For these and similar systems, the question for game designers becomes one of pricing. Pricing decisions can be a function of demand, how popular an ability is likely to be, as well as impact on the story. Check out what I wrote about frequency and payoff a while back, and think about how low-frequency and/or low-payoff abilities should be cheaper, in a point-buy system, than high-frequency and/or high-payoff abilities.

Advancement as Currency (Shadowrun, sometimes GURPS)

Often a subset of the point-buy system is when the points you use for advancement can also be used as in-game currency. This adds a layer of decision-making for the player, since they can either have the immediate payoff of spending a point in-game, or the quick payoff of spending the point on some small incremental advancement, or the delayed gratification of saving up for a powerful ability.

Shadowrun is the best example of this I could think of with its karma system, where you can spend karma in-game for benefits, but karma is also what you spend on new abilities for your character. GURPS has a version of this, where you can spend character points earned in play (or even left over from character creation) to do something in-game like have a suddenly wind-fall of cash. The big challenge here is human psychology. It is easy to, without thinking about it, use up a lot of your potential for advancement in-game, making up for unlucky rolls or ensuring your character shines in particular scenes. Players who don’t like to trust to luck will also tend to make more use of things like karma than others. This can lead to a discrepancy in advancement over time. Not necessarily a flaw, just something to consider.

Advancement by Use (Torchbearer, Call of Cthulhu, Skyrim)

Some games do away with experience points or character points granted for victories in the story or for certain player behaviors and simply link advancement to skill-use. The two biggest examples of this I could think of from tabletop games are Call of Cthulhu (the percentile versions) and the various games based on Burning Wheel, the most recent of which is Torchbearer. These systems take a bit more tracking than the ones above, but you don’t have to worry as much about pricing abilities or tuning the leveling system.

A system that links advancement to ability use seems to work better for less high-fantasy or high-powered games, at least where tabletop RPGs are concerned. And even in Skyrim, your Shouts are earned by completing the main storyline’s quests, or by exploring dungeons, rather than advancing based on use. In fact, that is probably a limitation on a system like this for a tabletop game – it would add a lot of complexity to do any kind of calculation – i.e., to make some abilities harder to raise than others based on use. I can also see limitations here – what to do about fantasy tropes like wizard spells, or psychic abilities, which are usually much more powerful than other abilities? Should your Cooking ability advance the same way that Fireball does? Maybe, but I can see a problem there.

Another challenge here is going to be ability-spamming. Players are going to be trying to use every conceivable ability as much as possible during a session if ability use is what is rewarded. This can have a similar effect to rewarding failure, mentioned above – it will make players branch out more in what they want their characters to try. It can also get repetitive, as in each session every character takes a moment to make a Photography roll, and then an Academics roll, and then a Gambling roll, or whatever. (I’ve definitely seen this come up in Call of Cthulhu.) A designer can find ways around this spamming issue, like limiting the total number of abilities that are counted in a given session, but it can definitely be a problem. On the other hand, this system does model reality pretty well (you get better at what you practice) and does reward a much more broad list of activities than leveling systems tend to.

Milestones (Fate Core, Parsec)

I’m sure other systems do this, but the example I came up with was Fate Core for a system that rewards characters based on reaching particular points in the story. (I mention Parsec because that game, which I designed, includes a system where players define obstacles and characters advance when those obstacles are faced in-game). A lot of video games do this with the main storyline or main quest-line – do whatever you want, take however much time you want, but you won’t advance until you get to a particular part of the story. This is, of course, significantly easier for a video game where the story is laid out ahead of time by the designers and writers.

But most games have an over-arching storyline of some sort. The DM or GM has come to the table with some kind of plan, much as players love to deviate. And a system like this could be an alternative to railroading, or designing every adventure as a box canyon. You can have more of a sandbox situation, but one that only rewards certain story milestones. Carrot rather than stick, so to speak, or honey rather than vinegar.

A story milestone system can be the way that each of the above systems are handled. The milestone could grant you a level, or character points, or a milestone could even be when the players have used a certain number of abilities in-game. In Fate Core, it functions a bit like leveling, as a milestone is a time you can improve your character as well as move abilities around or change them rather than improving them mechanically. Which brings us to…

Adjustment rather than Advancement (Spirit of the Century, Dresden Files)

In some RPGs, you don’t advance in any way that is marked on your character sheet. The story advances, and your character can change over time, but they don’t get better, or gain new abilities. Whether characters advance or not is a matter of taste, and will determine the kinds of games you play. Some games that include advancement can be played without, especially in the short term, and most games played as a one-shot will not include advancement.

Do you have more, or better, examples? Did I miss something? Let me know in the comments or on Reddit/Facebook/Twitter.

Review: D&D 4th Edition Dark Sun

This is a brief take after my reading of the new campaign setting for 4th Edition Dark Sun.  I have a lot more to say, but I’m trying to be succinct.  If you have particular questions, meet me in the comment thread.

A while ago I got a copy of Dark Sun for 4th Edtion.  I’ve recently finished reading the complete Prism Pentad for the first time, and might talk about those in another post.  Suffice to say – the quirkly illogic of old-school D&D combined with the brutality of the setting to make an interesting read all around.  Not all of the books are equally good (the 4th one is the worst of the lot, and I might even say skip it) but I read the whole five books, which says something.

I picked up the new 4th Edition Dark Sun Campaign Setting, wondering how 4th Edition’s invincible player-characters would combine with the life-is-cheap brutality of Athas.  The answer: you get a lot of 4th Edition wedded to a tiny bit of Dark Sun.

As an implementation of the Dark Sun setting, I think that the new campaign book basically fails.  There is some text about how tough Athas is, but there is very little that actually makes it tough in terms of system.  You have to spend about 5gp a day to live, and if you don’t,  you start losing healing surges from lack of water and so on.  Compare this to the most physically strong character in the books, Rkard the Mul, being laid low by having to walk out in the open for three or four days, reduced to a near-dead state, and Athas really loses it’s bite.

What I wanted was a grim, desperate land where travel itself, usually at best handled by a montage or a couple skill challenge, could kill you just as readily as the overwhelming collection of murderous, psionic fauna.  What you get is a way to drain 5gp a day out of your pocket.  Which, when a first level encounter might net the party hundreds of gold pieces, has little to no sting.

More than anything else, 4th Edition’s take on Dark Sun convinced me that the setting needs it’s own system.  D&D is not about being murdered by your harsh environment. It is not about deceit and back-stabbing and political maneuvering.  Both of these things feature prominently in the Prism Pentad books.

Where Dark Sun and 4th Edition overlap in a sweet spot is in gladiatorial combat.  I could see a game based on a cadre of gladiators in Tyr going really well – you get the monster-of-the week phenomenon without needing a lot of explanation, and you get to showcase what 4th Edition does – small-scale tactical combat with kewl powerz.

Once you leave the gladiatorial arena, though, 4th Ed falls apart as an engine for Dark Sun stories.

Rating: 2.5 out of 5 shards of obsidian.

D&D 4th Edition – Character Creation + Hacks Part 2

Long ago, in ancient times, I posted about how I handled 4th Edition D&D character creation with my home group.  Since then, a fine gentleman created a document for the method that I described.  It is available for download here.

It’s a good document and the method worked, for me at least.

D&D Game Day Sept 2009

Yesterday was D&D Game Day, celebrating the release of the Dungeon Master’s Guide 2. I remain conflicted about the DMG2. On the one hand, I read through it, and it actually has a lot of good advice for running games, especially pointed toward breaking DMs out of the ‘standard’ mode (long supported by all traditional rpgs) – that of the DM-as-author and players-as-tactical-combatants who also sometimes get to speak a few lines.

On the other hand, I’m aggravated by the slew of extra “basic set” books that WotC seems intent on putting out there. I mean, are we going to have the PHB5? 10? Where does it stop? When will diminishing returns really kick in? I’m finding that my thinking is moving away from the traditional supplement model of rpgs.

That being said, I can recommend the DMG2 for beginner DMs who want to up their game or for anyone who wants to get a lot of solid-seeming advice on how to run games more skillfully. This is not a crunchy book at all – in fact, it is downright chewy. There is a lot in there to think about, particularly if you are new to games, or are stuck in a kick-in-the-door-kill-the-baddie rut.

For my part, I came down to the FLGS here in San Rafael and ran a little module for some eager players. It was a lot of fun, and I learned something. 4th Edition runs really well with three players. I used three of the PCs distributed by WotC for use in games running on D&D Game Day (I let the players choose from the 5 there were) and just altered the encounters I’d set up to accommodate fewer PCs. It was probably the most fun I’ve had running 4th Edition D&D – about 3 solid hours of fun and no dragging. Lots of ass was kicked.

So I recommend tossing out the idea of the ‘classic’ 4-PC D&D party for a try. Go with 3 or even 2. I think the game not only works well, but actually better, with fewer players. You can’t throw as much at them, and that is it’s own kind of fun; I just felt like more happened.