I hate level draining

[EZ_Silvermouse]

I never put my friends through it, even if I had to force them to fight a mob like that or fudge a roll. So the other day my fighter gets drained by a vampire. Fun! Almost makes me want to quit since he's level 4 now. What makes it worse is that the DM ( my buddy's brother) takes glee in that kind of stuff.

What do you guys think about level draining?

[ShadowCross]

Since it's reversible/healable, I don't think it's a big problem. ShadowCross Bladesong
- Webmaster of succubus.de
- Messageboard Moderator: The Safehouse - An RPG Rogue Community
- Everquest: Baron Shadowcross Bladesong, Teir'dal Assassin, Antonious Bayle
- Dark Age of Camelot: Vaes Bladesong (ret.), Briton Tracker, Albion, Guinevere
- LARP: Lord Crian ShadowCross Lugh-Goldstien, Baron of Tirion, Shire of Pendaran, Terra Nigra

[EZ_Swipey]

If you dont have access to the spells to reverse/heal it though, or other spells to block its effect, I'd advise just running away yelling "death before draining" any time you see a level drainer. Pretty quickly the GM will either stop throwing them at you, or the campaign will break.

[ShadowCross]

If you dont have access to the spells to reverse/heal it though

Walk up to the next bigger temple and let them cast a spell on you. If you can't pay for it, well, maybe you can do a quest/task for the temple as payment for the spell?

[EZ_GoatsAndGippos]

Hmm situations like this in my game usually end up with the party holding people hostage demanding heal.. thats if they havent already pillaged and burned the temple.

[EZ_Arafain]

Sounds like you're in my D&D group then. =p -- Veteran Arafain Entreri, 60 Assassin
-- Arafein Soulstriker, 54 Champion Relic
-- Arafax Kokorozan, 20 Monk Giantfriend
-- Formerly of Requiem of Souls, now of Crusaders of Plilo
-- Formerly of The Rathe Server, now of Zebuxoruk
"Once, in the old west, a gentleman shot a professional gunfighter in the back. When asked why he didn't give the other chap a chance to draw, he replied, 'Well, he's dead and I'm alive and that's how I wanted it to be." -- from <u>Red Planet</u>, Robert A. Heinlein[i]

[EZ_GoatsAndGippos]

Im the Gm most the time. Most of our campagins turn into character vendettas agaisnt each other and we kill each other. I always won so i was forced to be the GM ive never had a group that wasnt evil.

[Glip the Gnome]

If I had a DM who enjoyed doing that kind of stuff to their players I'd tell him what I thought and quit the game.

I DETEST level draining, and won't play or run campaigns with it plain and simple. And a DM who enjoys taking the fun out of the game (whats the point if it isn't fun?) isn't a good DM.

[EZ_Telurinon]

Level drain CAN be used to good affect in a campaign. The key is to make certain that the players have the ability to learn about things like this ahead of time and that they are allowed to take precautions against it if they think of it ahead of time.

For instance, the quest giver tells them "Yeah, you're going up against a vampire" -- the players should then KNOW to buy Restoration scrolls, Holy Symbols, Holy water and anything else they can think of to prevent the vampire from even having a CHANCE of hurting them, much less Level draining them.

Information and access to it - the only way to be a successful adventurer!
Telurinon Aelvenborne, 52nd Rake of Black IsleMangore Orcsplitter, 40th Warrior of Black IsleDewin gan'Bran, 28th Wizard of black Isle
Skating away on the thin ice of a new day.

[Glip the Gnome]

Unless you're trying to make up for running a monty haul campaign earlier on and drop the players down a few notches in power (which is still a piss poor reason to do it) I can't think of one benefit of allowing that kind crap in a game.

[Jhani Vandolay]

In campaigns with a retirement level a little level draining now and then doesn't hurt. Not to claim the status of a "real professional" in any one endeavor has been a small price to pay for the many benefits and pleasures of trespassing. ~Leo Lionni

[EZ_Kethaal]

In campaigns with a retirement level, making LOTS of magic items, potions and scrolls is better then getting a level drained. hehe

[DarthEnder]

I don't think I've ever played a campaign that didn't have someone who could cast lesser restoration or a nearby temple.

[EZ_TibisHatter]

3E energy drain is a lot more lenient than 1E / 2E energy drain was - at least for the most part you get a chance to shrug off the effects after 24 hours with a Fortitude save; there were no such allowances in earlier editions.

And what's this crap about buying magical scrolls?

[Nenjin]

This thread made me chuckle. Brought back some memories...

DM:You carefully push the rotted door open. The stench of old death washes over you. You enter the room. At the back of the room stands what looks like a man, although he is wispy, and transperant. With a series of maddening whispers...he approaches you.

Josh: OH GOD DAMNIT! MAN EVERY TIME WE GO TO A DUNGEON, IT'S, WHAMMO!, HELLO WRAITH. MAN IF I GET MY LEVEL SUCKED ON MORE TIME I SWEAR I'M GONNA QUIT THIS @#%$.

DM: The Wraith senses the Paladin's desteable holy aura, and advances.....

Josh: @#%$ you

[EZ_Kintire]

My problem with level drain is that it uses external game mechanics in the world. 'Levels' don't exist in the world.... they are a game mechanic for assessing power. An in world creature should not be able to affect an external world game mechanic.

Stat drains are fine, because strength etc does exist within the world, but I don't believe that 'levels', or indeed other purely game mechanic things like xp, should be affected directly.

[ShadowCross]

Why don't you call it "life-force-drain" or "experience drain"? Both life-force and experience exist in the world.

Although we're at the edge of realism here anyhow... why should a level 20 wizard be unkillable by a hit from a simple sword? Everyone can be hit by a well-placed strike of a sword... I guess you have to leave realism at some point.. unless you are having a system like e.g. Shadowrun, where each char has exactly the same amount of "hp"... and where a single shot can kill everyone - if placed well enough.

[EZ_Kethaal]

If you can imagine a 80' long Red Dragon, work with me on the level think, k?

[EZ_Kintire]

No.

I don't demand that worlds be 'realistic' but I do demand that they be internally consistant.

80' Red Dragons exist in the world. People know about them, precautions are taken against them, they fit. Levels do not exist in the world. People don't ask 'what level are you' when they meet in the street, they don't screen jobs by level... it doesn't exist. Hence Red Dragons are fine, but level drain is not.

I may also say that experience points don't internally exist either and I'm not too happy with xp loss.

And HPs are one of my least favourite parts of the system. But that's for different reasons!

[ShadowCross]

I may also say that experience points don't internally exist either and I'm not too happy with xp loss.

Of course experience POINTS do not exist.. but experience does.
A seasoned fighter has a lot of experience... more than a new one.

Those attacks reduce your experience, take away memories, stuff you learned, training you had etc etc... that's fully okay internally for the world.

"Darn, since that undead creature hit me I feel like I was a novice again.. I can hardly remember how to fight as I used to fight..."
or
"Strange, his attack of negative energy must have influenced my memory... I cannot cast spells at powerful as before.. I simply have lost my ability to channel that much energy."


Something like that. I don't see a problem with these explanations...

[EZ_Fablar]

To be honest, I can understand Kintire's 'resentment' (if that's the right word) of level draining.
I personnally also feel that level-draining to be a bit of a left over from the wargaming 1ed where Gaxygygar must have said "we need a new nasty form of attack that has a chance to permentantly injure the players" rather than an idea to try to replicate a fantasy idea.
Coming from the idea of the undeads touch, I would have thought that the 'life-drain' in the form of stat-drain would have been more fitting, or even (and this would never have worked in 1ed) premature aging.

However, level-drain is the current mechanic, feel free to rewrite it in your own campaign , but otherwise use it so that everyone is singing from the same songsheet and knows what is going on. (levelling seems so much easier in 3ed anyway)

[EZ_Kintire]

Not convinced, SX. Level draining isn't amnesia. And all the effects you mention could be done far more realistically by stat drains. Can't swing so well as your str goes down, can't cast powerful spells as your Int/Wis/Cha goes down. Why should loss of life force cause loss of memory?

[ShadowCross]

I'm not just talking about memory.. also stuff like reflexes, instincts, the casters ability to "channel" energy, etc etc.. all that could be reduced by attacks of negative energy. I don't call it life-draining, although it's related...

And not hitting as well is not the same as Str loss.
There is a big difference between losing attack bonus and losing Str.

The only way I see to use stat-loss to replace level loss would be to reduce ALL stats by 1 or 2 (better) points instead of each level lost. Although I am not sure if the players would prefer that...

Although that way attacks of that kind not just reduce your experience, but they also make you slower, dumber, uglier, weaker, frailer.. etc etc... You will not just lose spell levels, HP and attack bonus, but also damage bonus, AC bonus, more HP, bonus spells, skills boni, etc etc.

[Jhani Vandolay]

Levels do exist within the system, just not as blatantly as they exist to us. Within numerous organizations, only people of certain levels of ability or higher can hold various possitions. Do they look on a character sheet to find out what level they all are? Of course not. But unless someone is going out of their way to hide their skill level, it can be determined through casting ability (I would say easiest), combat ability, etc.

[Nenjin]

One of my old GMs was adamant about not using Levels to determine strength in roleplaying sessions. OOC it was fine, but that didn't happen very often. So we had to be fairly creative to find ways to define the strength of our characters.

And I don't see that level draining is inappropriate. Read Manual of the Planes, and see what the plane of Negative Energy does to you. Can't remember what edition it was, but every meele round you lose 5 hps.
Period.

Now, being that the undead draw their power from that plane, is it so unreasonable? They are drawing the very living, natural vitality from your body and spirit. That effects _everything_ from hit dice, to combat preformance, to spell casting ability, heck, I think wraiths should drain stats WHILE they are at it.

So it's a little mean to do to players. So are ancient dragons with Psionics and Disentigrate. At least level draining wears off.

[EZ_Kintire]

I think you may be missing my point. I'm not saying its too rough on players... that was other people. I'm saying its intruding game mechanics into the gameworld. Ancient Dragons with psionics and disintegrate are fine. So is knocking a point off every stat insted of level draining. As for Jhani's argument... ingenious, but unconvincing. The assessments in the world are based on spell power or skill, not levels. It's true that in the rules, spell power and skill are based on levels, but in the gameworld they are based on talent and experience (not experience points, either). If a rogues guild is recruiting thieves they set skill requirements. You don't get people turning up and saying 'hey, I know I suck at stealth, but thats just cos I put all my points into use magic device. Next level I'll stick all of them into hide and move silently. That'll get them up to scratch! And you won't have to wait long... I'm only 173 points short...'

Its just silly.

[Nenjin]

I think I can see your point Kintire. That there is a difference between life force and experience? I can see that, but I still don't think level drain is totally inappropriate. Maybe a little skewed considering what creature has it, but I think it still has it's place.

[EZ_GMCryptkeeper]

Quote: I DETEST level draining, and won't play or run campaigns with it plain and simple. And a DM who enjoys taking the fun out of the game (whats the point if it isn't fun?) isn't a good DM.

I agree that the game needs to be fun, but alot of that fun comes from the excitement. How can the game be exciting if there's no actual threat to the players? As a player-What's the point of playing if you know you're going to win every encounter or that there won't be any penalties for failure? Seems to me a really good GM will know how use the threat of death/level draining to make a campaign really exciting.

Cryptkeeper

[EZ_TibisHatter]

Definitely, GMCryptkeeper. As with all things, though, there needs to be a balance.

I know I wouldn't throw certain types of attacks at the party (level draining, save or die, etc) on a regular basis unless they were reasonably able to deal with the consequences of them, or unless the party puts themselves in that kind of harms way deliberately. On the other hand, a modicum of both can increase tension - and can lead to further plot hooks as the low level party has to either quest for the resurrection of a fallen comrade, or the restoration of lost abilities.

I know most players would not have much fun at all if they had to act effectively as level 1 in a party which otherwise averages level 6; there would simply be nothing they could effectively contribute, and it would make for a pretty miserable session or few.

As for level draining being a mechanical construct of the level system, that's a reasonable criticism; however, when the system is level based it's arguable that the best way to represent an attack on your life essence is a level drain - and if you don't like the level-based rules of D&amp;D, that's certainly your perogative, and I'm sure you'd enjoy a nice game of GURPS instead

[Glip the Gnome]

In the campaign I played in ressurrections are not something you can expect if you die.

Thats a pretty big farkin risk right there

Level draining is just dumb, and I'm happy everyone in my group agreed.

[Nenjin]

Like...no ressurection as in the spell doesn't exsist? Or no ressurection as in the clergy won't do it for you? A) is rough. Typically, if you wanted a rez in some of the campaigns I was in, it took an entirely divergent quest of nutty proportions to get it done.

[EZ_TibisHatter]

One big obstacle for getting hold of resurrections is the question "And, my child, what faith do you and your deceased companions follow...?"

Most churches generally object to raising any old Tom, **** or Harry from the dead unless you bribe donate significant sums to them, or you are willing to perform a significant service, usually backed up with Quest spells.

[Nenjin]

Yub, thats about the size of it. Getting ressurected usually meant a diety switch for the character.

[Glip the Gnome]

They didn't really exist. We figured once something is dead, its dead, unless it becomes the undead in which cases its still dead, but only living.

...er, or something like that

But yeah, none of us were ever too keen on the idea of ressurrection, that kind of magic wasn't something we thought mortals should have.

[EZ_Kintire]

I do enjoy a good game of gurps actually.... but I don't always get to pick the ruleset.

And I don't see why we should have level draining when stat loss works just as well...

[Kroe]

UGH! I hate level draining.

If the GM is good he'll already be prepared to provide ways for you to regain the level, but unfortunately there are alot of DM's that don't plan that far ahead or who's plans are so convoluted it never happens.

[EZ_Swipey]

I never really liked GURPS all that much, or maybe I just never ran into a good game of it

Seems like buying up your stat is almost always better than buying up more than 2 or 3 skills based on that stat.

[DarthEnder]

Level drain good.

I level drained a party member just this week.

They didn't have a cleric in the party, but the archeologists that hired them did. And part of their contract included free healing spells that was within the power of the archeologist's cleric's ability. So they spent an hour climbing out of the dig site, got Restored, went to bed for the night, and went back down the next morning.

No big deal really.

Death bad. Unless you have a cleric capable of casting level 9 spells, even getting ressed costs you a level of experience. A level that can't be removed through restoration.

[EZ_Thanak Kalahed]

Level drain is a good tool, not to be used carelessly

When I'm GM I usually try to make the campaing as open ended as possible. I never put my player into a situation where they must absolutly go a certain way or kill certain monsters to achive something.

When I put level draining mob, I usually give proper warning. If the player decide to fight them anyway... well they can only blame themself.

Player 1 : He you , what's in that old tower on the hill there ?
NPC : It's hunted sir, they say it's filled with undead, no adventurer never came back from it !
Player 2 : Ph4T L3Wt !

GM : /grin

[EZ_DreamspinnerSethan]

Let me say the mechanics of Level-draining are refered to in 3rd as 'energy drain' . . .

From what I remember reading, it's draining the energy from a character, sapping their will to live. And it's not . . . draining, just bestowing a 'negative level'.

Big semantic difference . . . you're not having something *taken* from you, you are merely getting a penalty across-the-board.

The way I run it, modified most likely:

- You get-1 to Skill, Ability, Combat rolls.
- You lose one HD for purposes of spells determining HD (Sleep, Charm)
- You do NOT lose skill points, experience points, bonuses, spells, and the like.
- You do NOT lose Feats.
- You MAY try once every 24 hours to shake it off. [And a failure does not mean 'I dropped the die, let me reroll that'.]

I hate it, it is a difficult thing to abide by, but if you are going places with no healer close by . . . well . . . *shrug*

Why do you think so many DON'T come back from those places?

[EZ_Kintire]

It remians, however, an intrusion of of stage mechanics into the onstage action.

[EZ_DreamspinnerSethan]

And so are Hit Points, Armor Class, Levels altogether, and 'Spell Levels'.

I mean think on it, Hit Points are supposed to represent how healthy you are . . . but at 100% health Level 1 Fighter can't take the same hit a Level 4 Fighter can . . . so it's clearly broken.

Armor class is supposed to represent how tough a creature is to damage, but isn't it actually easy to hurt someone in 150 pounds of steel on them (Full Plate Mail, Tower Shield)? Ask the French after the Battle of Agincourt; with a longbow, arrows go through platemail like tinfoil. Not only that, but dodging is a lot harder in platemail . . .
So, why aren't bows more effective against platemail? It takes a mid-level archer to be able to even scratch someone in Platemail (or a lucky roll)

Levels are worthless, too, I mean . . . think on it, you fight forever, and you suddenly become more powerful? We shouldn't even have Levels. Why would fighting all the time make you stronger? What is 'experience points' anyway? You learn from killing your enemies, but doesn't that happen anyway?

Spell levels . . . how is this method of determining a spell's power even remotely accurate? The spell Magic Missile, a 1st level spell, always hits regardless of defense, does 1d4+1 damage, and gets stronger as the caster levels up. It always hits, nobody can dodge it. Doesn't that seem unrealistic?
Meanwhile, the spell 'Fireball' is less effective because you're blanketing a huge area with an explosion of fire, and can hurt yourself with it. Not to mention hapless allies, or treasure you hope to liberate . . . and the enemy may not even be hit for all of it, if he's good at making Saving Throws. So the fireball hit him no matter where he dodged to . . . even if he made his Reflex throw?
(Excluding Rogues, who can smack a Red Dragon in the face and Evade the PO'd dragon's return shot)

Come to think on it, the whole Dungeons and Dragons system is wholly flawed, it is chock full of rules impacting on 'the game world' . . . maybe someone should change it all so it doesn't.

Sorry, but this particular subject is discussed at length on the Wizards' boards. It's just . . .too . . . blech. I've heard most of the arguments for realism, game-world balance . . .
It's all sort of like this . . . the 'Negative Level' thing isn't the only thing in the game which makes no sense in the game world. It's just the one everyone picks on because they feel it's the worst possible rule . . .

Nobody considers the 'Death by Massive Damage' rules

[EZ_Swipey]

My take on DnD

AC = A combined measure of mitigation and avoidance. being agile will raise your AC, but so will a thick hide.

HP = A combination of raw thoughness and a representation of skill's effect on making a person harder to kill. A sleeping or unconsious character can be killed in a single round regardless of HP or AC. Though, realistically, one taken completely by suprise should be equally as killable.

One could break up these two stats to add "realism" (Make change AC to two stats, one for how hard the target is to hit, and the other for how hard it is to damage. Plate mail wearers would be ac 14 to hit, but, say, the first 6 or 8 hp of damage from every hit doesnt count (or half that if the weapon hitting is specifically designed to punch armor (picks, certain arrowheads, etc))

Then one could change HP such that they never go up unless one's Con goes up. The extra difficulty in killing an experienced warrior would be represented by raising his avoidance AC, as he is much more skilled at blocking/dodging and knowing what is likely to happen in a fight. But less HP would still result in a LOT more characters getting killed, which isnt much fun for the players. Heck, if a fighter never had more than 14 HP, a 6d6 fireball would be a horribly dangerous thing.


I've played a number of systems, and DnD's big advantage is that it is fast to run fights in.

[EZ_Prenn]

Someone who has never had a sprain would be in mortal pain with a broken bone.

Someone who has gone through massive surgical operations, or other forms of physical trauma (while still being disabled and feeling the same level of pain) could tolerate it far better.

That is the way HP are considered in DnD, that is why barbarians get damage reduction at high levels.

HP never moving would be very silly. <u>Baron Pren, Human Grandmaster</u> on The Tribunal Server
We came to drop bombs
Callin' every man in the arms
And yo, sound to your law
Smartbomb

Officer of Mithril heart Brigade

[EZ_Swipey]

The pain thing, in addition to a generally bigger, stronger body, would explain why warriors start with more HP than wizards. At level 1, a warrior has 2.5* the HP of a wizard, 10 vs 4.

Once one starts adding HP for levels, and explaining that said HP are a result of increased pain tolerance, it establishes that nearly all deaths at lower levels are caused not by damage, but by the inability to handle pain.

Take for example, two warriors. One is level 1, the other level 9. Both have an 18 con. The level 1 warrior has 14 hp, the level 9 one, 90 hp. (10+8*5.5+36)

They are walking down the street talking when an eeevil level 10 wizard throws a fireball at them, rolling average and doing 35 hp damage. Neither warrior saves. The level 1 warrior is at -21 hp (very, very dead) while the level 9 warrior is at 55 hp (not even half dead). SO.. Is the level one warrior's corpse charred beyond recognition, or has it only taken the same apparent physical trauma as the level 55 warrior, aside from dying of the pain?

[EZ_Kintire]

It all depends on what you mean by 'realistic'. By realistic I mean internally consistant. D&amp;D worlds do not have to be consistant with the real world, but they do with themselves. HPs represent more than just physical damage; they represent luck, experience, the favour of the Gods, Chi etc. In your example, the fireball waxed the low level warrior because he is not very experienced, hasn't contributed enough to the world for fate to protect him or whatever. The high level warrior has; he leaps aside turns sideways to avoid the worst of the blast or whatever.

The point is that HPs are consistent through the world. It is an internally accepted fact that some humans are harder to kill than others (or should be; I accept that all to often scenario designers do not do this, but heigh ho.) Similarly alignment; this too is reflected throughout the world, spells can detect it, the planer layout reflects it.

It isn't true of levels though. Nothing else in the world, except a few spells, refers to them. You can't detect them, people don't discuss them, there are trainers about the place teaching skills; the list goes on. They are purely a game mechanic, and do not exist within the world.

Except that some monsters, utterly randomly, can drain them.

[EZ_Swipey]

Exactly. HP is a representation of a number of things all tying into how hard it is to kill someone in a high fantasy RPG setting.

It is one of the conventions of the genre that an experienced warrior is not killable by a lucky shot from a weaker foe. It takes many weaker foes, or a lengthy duel with one greater one to kill him. Having HP, the representation of how hard it is to kill something, go way up with experience enforces this convention, therefore it is unneccessary, really, to come up with a rationale, IMO.

In reality, no matter how experienced the warrior, he could be killed by a single arrow shot by the greenest archer, should that archer get lucky and have his arrow hit in a good spot (through the eyeslot?), but having the character one has played for months or more be killed ingloriously by chance and an unworthy foe isnt fun. And RPGs are about fun.

[EZ_DreamspinnerSethan]

Level drain is referred to as 'energy drain' because the way the system refers to it is basically damage to the spirit of someone, not to the body.

It's a tool to be used rarely, sparingly, or else it does become 'cheap'. I don't use Wights as a common enemy (hated them before), but Spectres are in there as 'mini boss' style creatures of a dungeon. And in tougher dungeons, there are such things as vampires (though I do plead guilty to changing into house rules for them).

And if you noticed, poison and diseases are a heck of a lot worse in 3rd edition than they were before with ability damages . . . an elf warrior almost was outright killed by a poison in my group because he lost 10 of 11 constitution

Another reminder to not discount the usefulness of a rogue . . .

[EZ_Hindraak]

*coughs* Edited by: Hindraak at: 12/31/02 9:22:19 pm

[EZ_Qutsemnie]

level drains are a tactical threat. when its used like that its appropriate. no other spell drops your characters down hp/to hit/saves/unmemspells in such a severe fashion. in fact if i were just opposed to level drain i would "invent" a new effect that did all those things and keep the level the same. but then thats alot of work and also wouldnt have the effect of causing spell casters to cast with less fury=)

its healable. if i was in a campaign that it wasnt. mysterious potions of restoration would appear. why? cause its a tactical threat. its a way of saying if you just let these mobs gang on your tank your tank is going to be unhealable at some point cause hes going to be level 3ish...

its also a strategic threat to the party. if the strategic threat of level drain is about then the cleric has to waste mems on restoration and negative energy protection. strategic cause the cleric has lost power to a threat they may never see.


purposeless? not really. and if the cleric doesnt want to mem restoration or negative energy protection or nobody wants to roll such a character... tough.

but all things are for fun. tough can never be to tough. and what is this eq? whats the fuss bout your levels. CRY i stayed up all nite leveling this toon.

if DnD ceases to be bout just playing you might as well play eq.

[EZ_Kintire]

A perfectly acceptable view.. for a skirmish wargamer. As a roleplayer, I prefer my worlds to be internally consistant. I am NOT complaining that its too tough, I'm complaining it's too intrusive.

[EZ_Amzin Kwon Do]

I consider it internally consistant, because it deals with something we have no way of measuring or affecting in real life.... the soul, or spirit. If something suddenly ripped a large part of ones soul away, I would assume that person is NOT going to simply shrug it off and keep going. A person would feel emptier, not whole, disturbed. You can restore that energy, that piece of you, with a healing spell or item, or you can gain it back, or at least, learn to live without it, by continuing on, and trying to make yourself what you once were. That's how I look at it, at least.