Make PC start out more powerful then level up slowly.

[Andhaira]

In all crpgs pcs start out pathetically weak, but after gaining like 20 or more levels become really strong.

 

I prefer another way: Let the pc and companions start out stronger (say level 5 or so when compared with other rpgs) but they level up slower. And let the max level be 10-12.

 

This will allow for a much more fun and interesting first half of the game IMO.

[Tigranes]

I think it should be tweaked with too, but that way it risks getting boring in the second half.

[Humanoid]

It's really just setting a baseline of what a level one character is, really. If you're going to apply the level mechanics to every entity in the game, then sure, it would make sense that a level 1 would be your average guy on the street and to bump up the player character's starting level. If the character system is going to be applied only to your party, and perhaps your foes, then it's a doddle to just have that level 1 baseline as say, experienced army veteran.

 

In practical terms, it's a matter of whether you want to have random civilian NPCs attackable or not and whether they should fight back as a fully fledged combat-enabled actor or just have them keel over when you hit them. Having each NPC be fully realised makes for an elegant system sure, but there's also a potential shortcut around some work that largely would go unseen by the majority of playstyles (i.e. non-mass-homicidal ones) in having generic NPCs being simplified objects (with some possible static interactions like merchants).

Edited September 15, 2012 by Humanoid

[Nefastus]

I don't know, I like the feeling towards the end of the game that your character has really come a long way from his humble beginnings. It really lends a sense of epicness to the character development to parallel that of the plot line. Maybe starting out struggling with mutant bunny rabbits at the beginning isn't too realistic, but it's important to maintain a sense of progression.

[dlux]

The game should always be challenging - from start to finish.

[Audiocide]

I don't know, I like the feeling towards the end of the game that your character has really come a long way from his humble beginnings. It really lends a sense of epicness to the character development to parallel that of the plot line. Maybe starting out struggling with mutant bunny rabbits at the beginning isn't too realistic, but it's important to maintain a sense of progression.

 

I agree with this. Going from struggling to survive in the beginning to effortlessly dispatching all but the most powerful enemies towards the end creates a real sense of progression.

 

There's a couple of ways you can play that too. Rushing through the storyline quest and finishing the game at level 15 feels very different to really taking your time and getting there with a level 25 character.

[Infinitron]

Yep. Brutal, life-and-death low-level combat is always a joy. I wouldn't want a game without it.

[Tale]

I like the idea that you start off struggling to survive. What I dislike is the idea that the random dice gods decide if you live long enough to make it to level 2. No low level PC should be able to die from a single critical hit from nameless bandits, unless the encounter is really weighed in his favor in other ways.

[Infinitron]

I like the idea that you start off struggling to survive. What I dislike is the idea that the random dice gods decide if you live long enough to make it to level 2. No low level PC should be able to die from a single critical hit from nameless bandits, unless the encounter is really weighed in his favor in other ways.

 

That's only a problem if you're placed in a linear corridor and the only way out is through those nameless bandits. Otherwise, pick your battles and go kill some goblins instead. Humans are tough.

[Muzrub333]

Gotta disagree with the OP. I love the challenge of the early part of games much more than I enjoy god mode towards the end. Ideally we start with a knife, some sandals, and some really crappy clothes. No money, nothing. Just as a pitiful wastrel, scrounging for everything we can get, and making friends along the way.

[WDeranged]

I'm also torn over this, I really like to struggle early on in a game but I don't have much to say, just maybe that it shouldn't be too punishing, it's not Super Meatboy

[Covnam]

I think this really depends on the character and where he's coming from. If he's just starting the game as some random guy in a crowd (or worse off) then it makes sense that he's no better then anyone else and may be taken out when the game first begins. If he's a war vet though, then I would expect him to be a bit more powerful then the average bandit on the road.

[Humodour]

Have the level system be less linear like Fallout or Vampire the Masquerade. So that you can choose all the awesome skills at the start, or at the end (making the game harder or easy at your discretion), and you can go to the hard or easy areas whenever you want.

[LadySpace]

I like the OP's suggestion in principle, but I'm not sure this is the sort of game in which such a choice is a good idea. Frankly, a measured approach like this would work better in a game with a little more Fallout flavoring, one with a point-buy, non-class-based leveling system.

Edited September 16, 2012 by LadySpace

[Badmojo]

I love leveling (kind of the point of many games) and I do NOT want a level limit. I love going from a weak nobody to a near god machine at the end, that is the fun, but I understand why some would not want to. Perhaps have an option in settings to turn on a level limit for those who want to be limited?

 

One thing I hate is having to grind, grind, grind to level up for some super hard monsters, perhaps a little cheat where you could convert gold to xp? And/or buy some skills from trainers in the game.

[duskwind]

Getting more powerful as you progress is great, but virtually doubling in power when you go up to level 2 is a bit ridiculous; I agree with starting out a bit tougher, particularly in hit points.

[Longknife]

I disagree.

 

Personally I get bored if I don't have a sense of progress. Starting out strong and seeing little improvement sounds horrible.

[Andhaira]

Guys, I am NOT saying there should be a lack of progression. Reread my initial post. I am saying start out stronger, but level up slower. In the end that should balance it all out.

 

BG was great, but getting killed by a single strike from a wolf outside candlekeep was pretty pathetic.

[Tale]

In that case, it seems like overkill. You can simply increase starting HP to avoid that problem, without needing to effect leveling rates or starting level. You may want to reduce HP gain per level to offset the increased start, but the other stats and general level don't need to change any.

 

Or even just have them start at level 2 or 3. Jumping all the way to 5 and slowing down leveling are unnecessary.

[limaxophobiacq]

Yeah, I would prefer if you started out at as powerfull as you are at the start of BG 2 or at least as torment/nwn2 (as strong as a level 3-4 dnd character) rather than as pathetic as a level 1 dnd character.

[Rabain]

Well you can slow down character power development in other ways, such as giving players access to non-combat skills early so they can make use of them. For example if there is a skill like Cunning where you can outsmart someone in a conversation it would seem to me to be less useful to give access to that late in the game because you would miss out on so much dialogue opportunity in the early game.

 

Likewise you could focus on defensive skills early and unlock more powerful offensives later, giving you more survivability but not necessarily the power to roll over opponents without use of some tactics.

[daz23]

I disagree, I love being weak and afraid of everything that moves in the beginning of the game. I would like more emphasis on armor. If you fight without armor, or weak armor, you should be dead in 1 or two hits, this includes high levels characters also.

[limaxophobiacq]

I disagree, I love being weak and afraid of everything that moves in the beginning of the game. I would like more emphasis on armor. If you fight without armor, or weak armor, you should be dead in 1 or two hits, this includes high levels characters also.

 

I don't really get how this is supposed to be playable. Sure some PnP games do this instead of having huge hp-pools and work fine, but that's because they let you parry and dodge almost all attacks, which would get statistically improbale to maintain given how many more fights you usually have in computer game comparet to tabletop.

[daz23]

I disagree, I love being weak and afraid of everything that moves in the beginning of the game. I would like more emphasis on armor. If you fight without armor, or weak armor, you should be dead in 1 or two hits, this includes high levels characters also.

 

I don't really get how this is supposed to be playable. Sure some PnP games do this instead of having huge hp-pools and work fine, but that's because they let you parry and dodge almost all attacks, which would get statistically improbale to maintain given how many more fights you usually have in computer game comparet to tabletop.

 

If the game focuses more on story and adventure and less on "Action RPG", this would work very well. You could get in fights if you have the equipment you need or try to skip fights by running, charming your way out, etc. I'm honestly sick and tired of "Action RPG" and would like to see more focus on the "RPG" part.

[1varangian]

Good topic.

 

I would also like the "power curve" to be more gentle. No one hitters at level 1, and still somewhat humanlike at max level. A high level warrior should always be in danger surrounded by a mob of low level creatures, so realistic in that sense.

 

In DnD (3e) terms, instead of 1-20 I'd like it to be around 3-15.