[DF] How powerful can the PCs get before the game breaks?

[Pagan]

Originally Posted by Greg 1

Do you think this applies to DF? A 1,000 point DF character, let alone a party of 1,000 point DF characters, is not going to be run off by a disgruntled farmer with a bow.

Who said the guy was a farmer? Only lack of imagination will limit you. If you want to DF it, use a 400 pt. (and really, even in DF, using point totals instead of skill levels to equal challenge is not a good indicator) assassin with Sharp shooter, Weapon master bow, Heroic archer and to be mean a good poison. Give the guy a magic item or two which cloaks him with invisibility and a armor divisor bow and you'll challenge even your 1000pt characters.

Especially in DF, you're limited only by your imagination.

[Mateus]

And only to remember... D&D 3.5 has a LOT of muchkin. One player of mine once made a level 6th character that deal something like 8K damage in a single blow... And you could get a ridiculous Armor Class in 2nd level (like 30...) or shoot a insane number of shurikens. So it always depends of what is valid and how the GM runs the game.

[CousinX]

Originally Posted by Greg 1

Avoiding the point at which the game seems "incredibly silly" is relevant to my interest, so I'm interested in about where you think that point might be.

Well, the features that make D&D silly at high levels are built into the system even at lower levels. Hit points (and to a lesser extent, resistance rolls aka saving throws) that increase at each level are the most egregious -- there's literally nothing that a low-level character can do to threaten a high-level one, because no single attack that the low-level guy can make will even slow the high-level guy down -- and virtually any attack mounted by the high-level guy is going to wipe out the lower-level one. This leads to the PCs being able to walk into a town and know that the only thing keeping them from razing it to the ground is their own self-control.

It's hard to say the exact point when this happens in D&D, but it starts to become an obvious problem around 10th level or so, depending on what levels the GM assigns to NPCs such as guardsmen, city watch, etc. As soon as the party is powerful enough to take on an entire city's police force by themselves, I'd call it pretty silly.

GURPS doesn't have this problem, since HP and resistance rolls don't balloon as in D&D, and combat is handled realistically enough that a low-powered character can conceivably score a hit that takes down even the baddest opponent -- and a large number of opponents is much more of a threat, even to powerful characters. DF bends several Basic Set rules to get closer to the D&D of Olde, and still doesn't quite reach the level of munchkiny goofiness that high-level D&D reaches.

[martinl]

Originally Posted by Greg 1

Avoiding the point at which the game seems "incredibly silly" is relevant to my interest, so I'm interested in about where you think that point might be.

For me DF starts out at "incredibly silly." Both the PCs and the villains in vanilla DF seem insane to me. It's a genre where the best route to power is either breaking and entering or ridiculous Rube Goldberg megalomaina, yet the non-PCs/villains are pretending to be various medieval stereotypes in a context where it makes little sense.

If this setting seems sillier when you take the 15 foot fire breathing lizard that lives in the forest and replace it with a 30 ft iron plated fire breathing flying lizard that lives on the mountain, it is only a small incremental silliness increase...

[martinl]

Originally Posted by CousinX

there's literally nothing that a low-level character can do to threaten a high-level one, because no single attack that the low-level guy can make will even slow the high-level guy down -- and virtually any attack mounted by the high-level guy is going to wipe out the lower-level one. This leads to the PCs being able to walk into a town and know that the only thing keeping them from razing it to the ground is their own self-control.

Magic items. In my old DnD game, scrolls/wands of certain spells that were reliably threatening to higher level PCs were stockpiled like panzerfausts. When the army saw "armor," and lacked it's own to counter, the scrolls came out.

As a general tangent, my game made much more sense when I re-organized the NPCs with the idea that mid+ level PCs were "tanks," and stole RW anti-tank tactics against them. (Switching rulers from high level badasses to rich low-mid level types covered in protective and enhancing magic items didn't hurt either.)

[CousinX]

Originally Posted by martinl

Magic items. In my old DnD game, scrolls/wands of certain spells that were reliably threatening to higher level PCs were stockpiled like panzerfausts. When the army saw "armor," and lacked it's own to counter, the scrolls came out.

To some degree, I can see that working, but a few flies immediately show up in the ointment: first, it assumes that magic items are common and easily obtained enough for low-level characters to routinely be outfitted with them. This seems innocuous enough, just a design choice by the GM, but it inevitably leads to the PCs (who must triumph over their foes, or the campaign ends) getting piles and piles of enchanted loot.

As a result, high level characters are likely to have more (and more powerful) magic items, and are likely to seek/develop various countermeasures to nullify the benefit of the items that are frequently used against them. In the long run, it leads to an arms race that makes magic items a common, dime-a-dozen sort of thing, with high-level character still ending up on the top of the heap. Which is totally in-genre for D&D, but doesn't really solve the problem of high level PCs being nigh-untouchable by the NPC masses.

[martinl]

Originally Posted by CousinX

To some degree, I can see that working, but a few flies immediately show up in the ointment: first, it assumes that magic items are common and easily obtained enough for low-level characters to routinely be outfitted with them.

Default assumption in 3.5. The trick is to use cheap stuff that is still reasonably effective if used in numbers. A 1st lvl scroll in 3.5 is 25gp, and IIRC a charge on a 1st lvl wand is 15gp. For 2nd lvl, the numbers are 150 and 90. This is comparable to normal military equipment costs.

the PCs (who must triumph over their foes,

Completely disagree. The PCs are not guaranteed a victory over anyone they pick a fight with. If they pick a fight with the army, it should be potentially suicidal. An army that is not able to deal with roaming bandits (PCs) is not worth the name.

Now it would be a dick GM move to make the PCs fight an army when you made it so they would lose and die, but why would you do that?

As a result, high level characters are likely to have more (and more powerful) magic items,

Don't use powerful stuff, use stuff that works via attrition. The big thing PCs lack compared to armies is actions. Choose stuff that uses actions inefficiently but money efficiently.

and are likely to seek/develop various countermeasures to nullify the benefit of the items that are frequently used against them.

Sure. However, if the PCs develop a method to beat armies effectively, either they or some copycat will use that method to conquer territory, and suddenly be on the other side of the arms race. Chaos would reign for a while, certainly.

It might be a fun bit of historical cruft to have a few "warlord eras" where the balance was the other way. If the PCs want to start a new one, more power to them I say.

In the long run, it leads to an arms race that makes magic items a common, dime-a-dozen sort of thing, with high-level character still ending up on the top of the heap.

I disagree. The trick is to use items that are less effective than the normal actions a high level PC might take, but not harmless against them. Having 1000 scrolls of magic missile at lvl 1 power will not make an arch mage much stronger individually, but will make his army or barely trained 1st level apprentices a tougher nut to crack.

[blacksmith]

Originally Posted by Greg 1

Note, this is not just a question about how far the GURPS rules extend, but about the limits of genre.

Depends on what your genre sources are. In diablo you storm hell and kill everything in it.

[blacksmith]

Originally Posted by Greg 1

Avoiding the point at which the game seems "incredibly silly" is relevant to my interest, so I'm interested in about where you think that point might be.

Define "Incredibly Silly"

If you take your inspiration for earthdawn or Malazan Book of the Fallen 1000 points is doable fine.

This isn't about silly or serious, it is about suspension of disbelief.

[blacksmith]

Originally Posted by Pagan

Who said the guy was a farmer? Only lack of imagination will limit you. If you want to DF it, use a 400 pt. (and really, even in DF, using point totals instead of skill levels to equal challenge is not a good indicator) assassin with Sharp shooter, Weapon master bow, Heroic archer and to be mean a good poison. Give the guy a magic item or two which cloaks him with invisibility and a armor divisor bow and you'll challenge even your 1000pt characters.

Especially in DF, you're limited only by your imagination.

The thing is that is getting a bit different than the image conjured by the phrase "A guy with a bow".