Level up rate?

[rjshae]

Back in the BG series, experience growth was relatively slow and it felt like an accomplishment to reach a new level. Since then, D&D v3.5 rules came out and level up began to feel almost like a cheesy accomplishment that didn't require much effort. That has become the trend in modern games: leveling up after every few battles. I have to wonder how this will be handled in PE? It sounds like Obsidian wants to return to the style of the BG series, which would seems to entail a return to slower level progress. If they do allow a more rapid level up, I hope they tone down the power growth rate so that lower level monsters remain a challenge for longer periods.

 

What do you think?

[Sensuki]

I want it to be slow, but because it's related to quest experience (or so they've said) it might end up being fairly controlled, but not perhaps as controlled as say KotOR II or something like that.

 

I hope there's some room for player improvement, for instance, on your first playthrough you level up slow, but as you replay more and more, you find more optimum ways to power level through trial and error.

 

I have a certain path that I play through Baldur's Gate 1 to get up levels pretty quick, involves rushing Imoen level 2, then going and picking the lock in the Beregost blacksmith to get the Bastard Sword +1 and going and taking out the wolf pack in the Temple Area. That gives most of my party a quick level 2.

 

That said, Baldur's Gate 1 was encompassed over 7-10 class levels, I assume this will be more like 20 ?

 

I don't think that's the type of play they want to encourage though.

Edited October 5, 2012 by Sensuki

[Osvir]

I hope it's slow too, or adjustable. Part of Difficulty Option?

 

There's a mod for Baldur's Gate Trilogy which allows you to lower your exp rate (I lowered it so low I got 1~5 exp per enemy slain xD).

[nikolokolus]

Slower is better. Preferably something on a logarithmic scale.

[silverjace]

Slower is better. Preferably something on a logarithmic scale.

Logarithmic? I would think exponential would be better, though still low amounts of exp

[Badmojo]

Adjustable might be a good idea. I do not mind if it takes a *slight* bit of time, but I don't want to feel like I am hardly progressing. Also, since the XP is quest based you cannot grind to level up which I am not sure how I feel about. On one hand it is cool, I liked it in VTMB, but on the other hand, there are times where you run into a foe/boss that is insanely hard and you need to do some quick level up in that situation. However, if it takes too long it will be very off putting and frustrating.

[Orogun01]

VTMB is probably one of the best leveling curves I've seen, just because it tied with the story enough that your progress was marked by the challenges and it affected the direction of the story (only superficially, the story would had still taken that turn but your PC level was adequate enough to suspend disbelief).

 

If they are going to do a slow progress curve they had better fill their world with enough content that the player is never left out grinding without any input from the game (that's just boring) I think that a faster curve tends cover up this fault better.

[Bloody Hypocrite]

It's hard to say at this stage. I don't want to burn through levels, but I obviouly don't want to feel threatened by a rat for any longer than necessary.

[Archmage Silver]

I'd prefer it to be slow going, taking exponentially longer the closer you get to the level cap. I'd also keep the level cap around 15-20 maximum, that should leave room for any expansion packs.

Edited October 5, 2012 by Archmage Silver

[Ninjamestari]

More levels = more room for customization. It's not the level curve you should be worried about, it's the power curve. Level 15-20 can mean anything from a pig farmer with a stick to an immortal demigod depending on the system. Also, your power and levels should grow as you progress in the story; the optimal rate at which you gain levels would go somewhere along the lines of first KotOR in my book; a steady stream of new abilities that accurately represent your current standing in the game world.

 

When you think about the leveling pace in terms of time played instead of in terms of story progression, you're on a very thin ice.

[Bloody Hypocrite]

More levels = more room for customization. It's not the level curve you should be worried about, it's the power curve. Level 15-20 can mean anything from a pig farmer with a stick to an immortal demigod depending on the system. Also, your power and levels should grow as you progress in the story; the optimal rate at which you gain levels would go somewhere along the lines of first KotOR in my book; a steady stream of new abilities that accurately represent your current standing in the game world.

 

When you think about the leveling pace in terms of time played instead of in terms of story progression, you're on a very thin ice.

True, you could just as easily break up 10 levels into a 100 if you really wanted to.

[Jarmo]

Slower is better. Preferably something on a logarithmic scale.

Logarithmic? I would think exponential would be better, though still low amounts of exp

 

Exponential amounts of XP necessary to reach the higher levels, yields logarithmic level progression.

 

 

More levels = more room for customization. It's not the level curve you should be worried about, it's the power curve.

 

This.

I'd prefer steady leveling without too huge leaps between levels.

Can be difficult to balance if there's a significant difference eg. between level 2 and level 3 spells.

 

I have a feeling though, that Eternity will be pretty much D&D by another name,

in that case I'd prefer... well heck, I don't have a preference even then.

 

 

Depends on the story, world and the system.

[FlintlockJazz]

I want leveling to be slow enough that you end up in the 'competent' or 'middling' range at the end of the first game at the most, like in Baldur's Gate 1. This then means that you not only avoid the situation where everyone should be in awe of your awesomeness after just one campaign (I view each game as a campaign, with adventurers having three or four in their lifetimes) but also leave room for progress in subsequent games (they have expressed desire to be able to import your character into future games after all).

[Lusankya]

I just don't want it to be like Fallout New Vegas, where I hit the maximum level when I only completed like 50% of the game.

[Semper]

I just don't want it to be like Fallout New Vegas, where I hit the maximum level when I only completed like 50% of the game.

 

this. because of sawyer's mod for new vegas, which deals with exp rates, i am confident that he as the project director won't go the level every minute route.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

I'm hoping it will be BG1 style of leveling with being around level 10 at the end.

[PublicNuisance]

I would like to see you gain the first few levels quickly to get you a taste of some better skills and then start slowing it down from there.

[Malkaven]

I don't mind slower leveling with frequent accomplisments.

[rjshae]

It's hard to say at this stage. I don't want to burn through levels, but I obviouly don't want to feel threatened by a rat for any longer than necessary.

 

Yes, they could do with fixing the first level vulnerability to house cats.

[Shevek]

I had asked Feargus how much advancement there would be in PE on KS. I was worried that since this was gonna be part of a series, there there might not enough advancement in the first installment. According to Feargus, leveling in PE will be comparable to like 12ish levels in the old IE games. This leaves room for more advancement in a sequel.

[ogrezilla]

I had asked Feargus how much advancement there would be in PE on KS. I was worried that since this was gonna be part of a series, there there might not enough advancement in the first installment. According to Feargus, leveling in PE will be comparable to like 12ish levels in the old IE games. This leaves room for more advancement in a sequel.

I'm ok with that amount, but I don't know how I feel about them planning things in this game around the assumption that there will be a sequel. Just seems like a bad idea.

[Waywocket]

I had asked Feargus how much advancement there would be in PE on KS. I was worried that since this was gonna be part of a series, there there might not enough advancement in the first installment. According to Feargus, leveling in PE will be comparable to like 12ish levels in the old IE games. This leaves room for more advancement in a sequel.

I'm ok with that amount, but I don't know how I feel about them planning things in this game around the assumption that there will be a sequel. Just seems like a bad idea.

 

I disagree - unless it's taken to the extent of intentionally not doing cool things because they're saving them for a later game that might not happen.

 

As long as it doesn't actively harm the gameplay in the first game it makes a lot more sense to plan for a sequel than to try to bolt one on to the end later.

[Shevek]

I was very pleased with the answer. They are (a) thinking ahead for a sequel and (b) planning to have about 50% more advancement than there was in BG1 (which I felt had too little advancement).

[ogrezilla]

I had asked Feargus how much advancement there would be in PE on KS. I was worried that since this was gonna be part of a series, there there might not enough advancement in the first installment. According to Feargus, leveling in PE will be comparable to like 12ish levels in the old IE games. This leaves room for more advancement in a sequel.

I'm ok with that amount, but I don't know how I feel about them planning things in this game around the assumption that there will be a sequel. Just seems like a bad idea.

 

I disagree - unless it's taken to the extent of intentionally not doing cool things because they're saving them for a later game that might not happen.

 

As long as it doesn't actively harm the gameplay in the first game it makes a lot more sense to plan for a sequel than to try to bolt one on to the end later.

that's true I guess. I'm more thinking of superstition haha

[AlexAB]

One aspect I would like in this game is a rather loose control of the XP points the party can earn. It would be nice if the player had incentives to both go after them or avoid them. For example, maybe if you want to get to the maximum level, you will need to use a smaller sized party, and you will need to do quests, or do them in certain ways, that aren't necessarily the best. For example, there might be a city somewhere with two factions vying for power. You could play them against each other and get XP for both quests, but doing so will escalate the conflict into an open war, killing hundreds of people. If this is made pretty much necesary if you want to get to the maximum level, it makes the choice of doing this or not actually interesting, I think.

 

I had asked Feargus how much advancement there would be in PE on KS. I was worried that since this was gonna be part of a series, there there might not enough advancement in the first installment. According to Feargus, leveling in PE will be comparable to like 12ish levels in the old IE games. This leaves room for more advancement in a sequel.

 

I really would prefer a smaller power increase for the game. The first five levels in D&D are very important. They mark your rise from a normal, clueless schmuck to an actual "hero". It is only by the 5th or 6th level that D&D characters are really larger than life. The following 5 levels, however, mar a different ascension. From a larger than life hero to someone with "name" level. That is, someone who is an actual mover and shaker in the world. That is why it is in the 10th level that characters would become able to build their own keep.

 

It just seems a bit hushed to me. 12 levels encompass both journeys, when I think each of these is already a bit too big for a single game. Maybe PE will have a different philosophy to approach its levels, but I think the people in Obsidian should be careful. It is hard to do justice to 12 whole D&D levels in a single game, and if you are not careful, you may end up making them feel rushed and destroying the internal logic to character leveling. BG2 did this as well. but it is a fault that I think it would be worth not copying.