Poll: RPG's with no level caps?

[BIGB0SS]

without level limitation only in online RPGs

 

[Deacon Cole]

How about RPGs without levels. PnP RPGs have had that concept since the 80's why are CRPGs still so very far behind ?

The 80's? Really? Which games?

Traveller, Call of Cthulthu, Star Wars, etc etc etc

Edit:- Im pretty sure WFRP was around then as well. GURPS as well & likely HERO system that might be a touch early though. Oh and Stormbringer and Judge Dredd

I see. Of course, those games don't really remove levels so much as divide them up among the various abilities and skills. So it's still the same thing, just more complicated.

 

[muffincakes]

IF there was no level cap, Then you'd continue leveling until the game would prevent you from leveling any farther, Ever the best monsters would be easiest for you.

Unless the monsters became proportionally harder to defeat, which I think most games without a level cap do.

That kind of defeats the purpose of leveling up, doesn't it? What is the point of leveling up if the obstacles level up with you?

I hate to throw in a bit of thought here, but if I recall, most RPG's don't allow you to level as a naked fist fighter. Part of these games battle requirements is earning better gear, typically found as monster drops. Most characters don't do so well with a wooden sword and cloth armor(if they are warriors), so it is important to level your equipment along with your character levels.

Now if you haven't gotten the point yet, it is that when RPG's have level-scaling enemies, they actually do get harder, because their equipment improves with them but, their equipment still has its own cap, so even with scaling enemies, your equipment can still be much greater than theirs, thereby giving you your god-like powers anyway. To sum it all up: The purpose of leveling is to be able to get better equipment, not to get inhuman base stats. It is the equipment that gives you power instead of your character level.

 

[Deacon Cole]

Some of the monsters have a lower bound on their levels, and perhaps there's a slight level lag between you being able to kill them and them starting to catch up with you. Also, you get more abilities when you level up, which is a huge incentive.

I think that lag idea would be a bit complicated to implement.

But you do make a good point about gaining new abilities, which should be kept distinct from increasing abilities, even though both are lumped together in leveling up.

 

[Orcus The Ultimate]

IF there was no level cap, Then you'd continue leveling until the game would prevent you from leveling any farther, Ever the best monsters would be easiest for you.

unless they would adapt and have similar levels than yours

well, yeah, but that usually sucks.

not necesarily, if there are different difficulty levels, and if the sidequests can be redone in many different ways, so there's a larger amount not only of replayability, but of content (aka stuff to do..) it might work.

 

[Deacon Cole]

To sum it all up: The purpose of leveling is to be able to get better equipment, not to get inhuman base stats. It is the equipment that gives you power instead of your character level.

As said earlier, there are two distinct things that get lumped together in leveling up. One is gaining new abilities, the other is improving existing abilities. Whether it's equipment, the character itself, or anything else, it still boils down to these two basic effects. New equipment can mean new abilities, but often it just means hitting someone with a sword better.

But what can we learn from this?

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

Level caps are inane arbitrary things that devs come up with when they can not balance or work out game mechanic issues, to me its rather simple "scaling X difficulty setting X character level +/- story progress= enemy level and ability" instead of doing it this so you can enjoy the game at your own pace to grind when you want you get hit with insipid rules that simple drag the game down..

The caps did not stop me from exploring FO3 to find the caps and limits on skills/levels sucked and it lacked balance all around..... it just made the feel all the more mediocre and limited.... A better way to handle DLC is to implement it where you get halved in your level/skills perks or you start new or be an ass and just add the DLC and play as your god character, when it comes to DLC and RPGs they have to stop thinking they are adding to a blank slate to the game, people have already been there done that adding new stuff with less caps is a bit disingenuous.

 

[Arisato-kun]

I think it's an interesting concept, which is why I play Disgaea. A level cap of 9999 and you can reincarnate as much as you want to increase your stats? Sounds good to me.

 

[Orcus The Ultimate]

well, as of today, it seems the majority agree with what i've said...

 

[Alex_P]

How about RPGs without levels. PnP RPGs have had that concept since the 80's why are CRPGs still so very far behind ?

The 80's? Really? Which games?

Traveller, Call of Cthulthu, Star Wars, etc etc etc

Edit:- Im pretty sure WFRP was around then as well. GURPS as well & likely HERO system that might be a touch early though. Oh and Stormbringer and Judge Dredd

I see. Of course, those games don't really remove levels so much as divide them up among the various abilities and skills. So it's still the same thing, just more complicated.

I can't think of many games from the 80s that eschewed power advancement altogether, mostly because I don't play those games. Because games were still overwhelmingly focused on modeling characters in terms of competency, it's not really surprising that most designers felt they needed some kind of advancement mechanic; there are more examples of games that don't do that around now.

IIRC, in-play advancement in Traveller was (intentionally) so slow that it hardly made a difference, though.

-- Alex

 

[Deacon Cole]

Except of course it increases immersion, is more realistic, allows for role playing as opposed to class playing (a subtle but large issue). It also allows players to see and and result of their choices & their preferences growing their character rather than an artificial leap in ability every 15 minutes. Things like hit points the primary reason for levels are implicitly detrimental to any role playing experience.

Most skill based systems actually lack any trace of 'levelling' particularly CoC's method which scales appropriately to the REAL WORLD.

Who wants to play a hero who at the begining of the adventure gets killed as easily by a rabbit as by a balrog a few days later? Look at D&D based games, players start with 4-12 hit points & a few days of play later have 120-360 ? This is comparable to a real world example how ?

Hey guys I can be killed by a single sword blow but give me some time to go squash rats & then I can take 30 ??????

How is wide leaps of ability related to opening a box or finding a door ? It isnt these mechanisms are artificial for children to measure their own advancement in some pathetic penis measuring scale. They are constructs from an artform that abandoned them 30 years ago.

That is a magnificent expression of your opinion.

 

[ModReap]

If you dislike level caps then you should like NISs' strategy games.

 

[Deacon Cole]

I can't think of many games from the 80s that eschewed power advancement altogether, mostly because I don't play those games. Because games were still overwhelmingly focused on modeling characters in terms of competency, it's not really surprising that most designers felt they needed some kind of advancement mechanic; there are more examples of games that don't do that around now.

Can you name some of these newer games?

 

[LeonLethality]

Star Ocean has had its level cap at 255 which is complete overkill (unless you are fighting the super boss who will still rape you if you are level 255)

 

[Jenova65]

And levelling up clearly brings 'something', since many people enjoy it I guess for those of us who do enjoy it, what it ''brings to the table'', is fun.

I am asking for something deeper than "fun." That is a shallow answer. What we need is to look at leveling up objectively and recognize what it is, what it does, and how it effects gameplay. Then we can examine it with greater clarity. So what does leveling up actually do?

(NOTE: and since you've already repeated the point, I'll say that I don't care that many people enjoy it. That is without substance. I am more interested in why they enjoy it and "because it's fun" says nothing)

You are arguing for argument's sake, you are trying analyse a gaming experience for other people, a game only needs to be fun, that isn't shallow it is a simple thing because that is all it needs to be. I enjoy it because there is a part of me that feels pleasure when I do it, I don't feel anything beyond that, why do I need to? Because it's fun may say everything, we are discussing something subjective, unquantifiable. I have a real life outside of games, we don't need to over think this.
Game - 1. An activity providing entertainment or amusement; a pastime.
That is what I play for.

 

[Shepard's Shadow]

I like a level cap. Otherwise, you can level your character until you have all the skills/talents and then what? You keep leveling just for the mental satisfaction that you leveled up again. I like a level cap better because it makes choosing skills/talents more important because if there isn't a cap then it doesn't matter what skills/talents you pick, you'll get them all eventually anyway.

 

[The Heik]

IF there was no level cap, Then you'd continue leveling until the game would prevent you from leveling any farther, Ever the best monsters would be easiest for you.

This. Level caps are designed to ensure that you'll always have a challenge.

 

[Alex_P]

Can you name some of these newer games?

Will do!

Spirit of the Century has no advancement by default. You can tune the power levels up or down when you start but there's no fixed procedure for changing character stats in play. The idea is that pulp superheroes don't really get stronger over time, they just have adventures.

Primetime Adventures doesn't have character advancement. The closest thing to it is that you get to rewrite your character sheet after each season (it's a game about stories with an explicitly TV-show-style structure), but that's changing what your character is about, not how "powerful" you are. Character effectiveness is defined by a single "spotlight" stat that rises and falls based on a predetermined track (like, you all sit down at the beginning of play and say, "Okay, I want to designate these sessions as the ones where my character is in focus, and I'll be more of a supporting guy in these sessions"). The reward mechanics are based around the players giving each other temporary bonuses for stuff they think is cool.

In In a Wicked Age, the only stats that can go up over time are attached to concepts rather than characters. Characters start each session with a fixed distribution of scores, which get depleted during play and then reset to their starting values next time you play that character. The reward mechanic is about making your character the underdog so he can come back in the next session.

Polaris has one stat that grows as you do stuff, called Zeal. Zeal lets you power through conflicts to get your way, basically. Then when it hits its peak it changes into Weariness and starts creeping back down again. And when it is back down to zero you will betray everything you stand for, so you'd better get busy dying before then.

There are games explicitly designed for short-term play that similarly don't have traditional advancement, as well, but I'm sure that's hardly surprising.

I don't think the Baron Münchhausen storytelling game from the 90s had any kind of advancement mechanics, either. I'm pretty sure I never saw a rule for improving character stats in Everway.

-- Alex