Why aren't NPC characters also becoming more powerful over time? Why do only you get to level up?

[Lhynn]

The real question is. Why arent they dying?
We cant walk 2 meters outside of town before we get attacked by goblins or wolves. How the **** are these people alive?

[WhiteShark]

The real question is. Why arent they dying?
We cant walk 2 meters outside of town before we get attacked by goblins or wolves. How the **** are these people alive?

Final Fantasy often explains this by saying cities have magical barriers around them, usually powered by crystals, that keep out monsters. I think it works well as a world-building element.

[Sinfield]

You will meet that same character again, but they will still be the same powerlevel as they once were. Maybe their level is bumped up, but story wise it seems like they haven't trained and become more powerful in the mean time like you did.

Ah **** I forgot to close my game and now my opponent is 20 levels higher than me. Gotta restart.

Serious answer:
I find any story/lore questions about levels to be odd because in games, levels are already completely unrelated to the worldbuilding and lore.
A level 20 character can defeat armies of level 10 characters. Its even worse if you're playing a game with a high level cap, because the gap in strength between levels is usually retained and you get absurd scenarios like a level 100 character towering over level 90 characters, but level 90 characters also tower over level 80 characters, but... You get the idea.
Are we going to explore the implication of fighters basically being ants compared to other fighters met later in the game?
Are we going to explore the implication of the Lich supervillain we defeated in a early mission being only level 40, even though a random wolf we met in the next adventure had to be level scaled to 60 so it'd be a threat to the current party?
The entire thing makes no sense.

[Lhynn]

I find any story/lore questions about levels to be odd because in games, levels are already completely unrelated to the worldbuilding and lore.

Its just an abstraction of character growth. I love more granular systems where advancement comes from doing actual things instead of a numeric arbitrary value for completing tasks, but those are rare.

[rusty_shackleford]

You will meet that same character again, but they will still be the same powerlevel as they once were. Maybe their level is bumped up, but story wise it seems like they haven't trained and become more powerful in the mean time like you did.

Ah **** I forgot to close my game and now my opponent is 20 levels higher than me. Gotta restart.

Serious answer:
I find any story/lore questions about levels to be odd because in games, levels are already completely unrelated to the worldbuilding and lore.
A level 20 character can defeat armies of level 10 characters. Its even worse if you're playing a game with a high level cap, because the gap in strength between levels is usually retained and you get absurd scenarios like a level 100 character towering over level 90 characters, but level 90 characters also tower over level 80 characters, but... You get the idea.
Are we going to explore the implication of fighters basically being ants compared to other fighters met later in the game?
Are we going to explore the implication of the Lich supervillain we defeated in a early mission being only level 40, even though a random wolf we met in the next adventure had to be level scaled to 60 so it'd be a threat to the current party?
The entire thing makes no sense.

Most of these issues should be addressed for trve simulationism because they break my suspension of disbelief

[Stack of Turtles]

I find any story/lore questions about levels to be odd because in games, levels are already completely unrelated to the worldbuilding and lore.
A level 20 character can defeat armies of level 10 characters. Its even worse if you're playing a game with a high level cap, because the gap in strength between levels is usually retained and you get absurd scenarios like a level 100 character towering over level 90 characters, but level 90 characters also tower over level 80 characters, but... You get the idea.
Are we going to explore the implication of fighters basically being ants compared to other fighters met later in the game?

I have never played a game that worked that way.

[WhiteShark]

I find any story/lore questions about levels to be odd because in games, levels are already completely unrelated to the worldbuilding and lore.

Here's the thing: they don't have to be unrelated! Much can be solved by cracking down on the power scaling, but your examples also contain some very strange assumptions:

Are we going to explore the implication of the Lich supervillain we defeated in a early mission being only level 40, even though a random wolf we met in the next adventure had to be level scaled to 60 so it'd be a threat to the current party?

Why should the party be fighting random wolves at level 60? At that point, if the game really must go on, the party should be traveling the planes and fighting packs of archdemons or the like. It's bad design to keep pelting a party of godlike power with wolf and goblin recolors.

A level 20 character can defeat armies of level 10 characters. Its even worse if you're playing a game with a high level cap, because the gap in strength between levels is usually retained and you get absurd scenarios like a level 100 character towering over level 90 characters, but level 90 characters also tower over level 80 characters, but... You get the idea.
Are we going to explore the implication of fighters basically being ants compared to other fighters met later in the game?

Are you trying to say the high strength scores should be reflected by the size of the character model? Honestly, that's a really neat idea, but it's also fine to attribute it to some innate divinity or similar. Hercules didn't have to be a hundred feet tall to have his strength. Player characters usually aren't normal people.

[Sinfield]

I find any story/lore questions about levels to be odd because in games, levels are already completely unrelated to the worldbuilding and lore.
A level 20 character can defeat armies of level 10 characters. Its even worse if you're playing a game with a high level cap, because the gap in strength between levels is usually retained and you get absurd scenarios like a level 100 character towering over level 90 characters, but level 90 characters also tower over level 80 characters, but... You get the idea.
Are we going to explore the implication of fighters basically being ants compared to other fighters met later in the game?

I have never played a game that worked that way.

Are you sure?

Have you never gone back to a earlier area in a game like Final Fantasy and noticed you take basically no damage during random fights, since the enemies are wimps compared to you? If you stopped there for a moment and started fighting enemies endlessly you'd notice you can rack a huge killcount without ever having to use any healing potions or spells. You could easily depopulate the entire area.
This works on games like Pokemon too. Go back to Viridian Forest at level 30, or to the endgame after you grind a your pokemon team level 100. You don't even need to evolve your pokemon for this unless its a magikarp or something, the level gap WILL be enough.
MMORPGs? City of Heroes. A enemy even 1 level higher than you gains bonus damage dealt, damage resistance, and accuracy. This scales so the gap between a level 30 player and a level 35 enemy is huge. The level cap is 50. Tree of Savior. The levels needed to make are less extreme here, but since the level cap was 360, a 100 level difference would make someone take 1 damage from enemy attacks. Maplestory... I don't remember it very well so I can't tell you but the level differences are huge here too.

To be clear to anyone else reading this, I think levels are a good mechanic. I'm just saying that any serious analysis of them against the game's worldbuilding falls flat.

[Sinfield]

A level 20 character can defeat armies of level 10 characters. Its even worse if you're playing a game with a high level cap, because the gap in strength between levels is usually retained and you get absurd scenarios like a level 100 character towering over level 90 characters, but level 90 characters also tower over level 80 characters, but... You get the idea.
Are we going to explore the implication of fighters basically being ants compared to other fighters met later in the game?

Are you trying to say the high strength scores should be reflected by the size of the character model? Honestly, that's a really neat idea, but it's also fine to attribute it to some innate divinity or similar. Hercules didn't have to be a hundred feet tall to have his strength. Player characters usually aren't normal people.

No you dork, I don't mean towering that literally.

[Stack of Turtles]

I find any story/lore questions about levels to be odd because in games, levels are already completely unrelated to the worldbuilding and lore.
A level 20 character can defeat armies of level 10 characters. Its even worse if you're playing a game with a high level cap, because the gap in strength between levels is usually retained and you get absurd scenarios like a level 100 character towering over level 90 characters, but level 90 characters also tower over level 80 characters, but... You get the idea.
Are we going to explore the implication of fighters basically being ants compared to other fighters met later in the game?

I have never played a game that worked that way.

Are you sure?

Have you never gone back to a earlier area in a game like Final Fantasy and noticed you take basically no damage during random fights, since the enemies are wimps compared to you? If you stopped there for a moment and started fighting enemies endlessly you'd notice you can rack a huge killcount without ever having to use any healing potions or spells. You could easily depopulate the entire area.
This works on games like Pokemon too. Go back to Viridian Forest at level 30, or to the endgame after you grind a your pokemon team level 100. You don't even need to evolve your pokemon for this unless its a magikarp or something, the level gap WILL be enough.
MMORPGs? City of Heroes. A enemy even 1 level higher than you gains bonus damage dealt, damage resistance, and accuracy. This scales so the gap between a level 30 player and a level 35 enemy is huge. The level cap is 50. Tree of Savior. The levels needed to make are less extreme here, but since the level cap was 360, a 100 level difference would make someone take 1 damage from enemy attacks. Maplestory... I don't remember it very well so I can't tell you but the level differences are huge here too.

To be clear to anyone else reading this, I think levels are a good mechanic. I'm just saying that any serious analysis of them against the game's worldbuilding falls flat.

Okay, so it's a weebslop thing. I was wondering.

[WhiteShark]

A level 20 character can defeat armies of level 10 characters. Its even worse if you're playing a game with a high level cap, because the gap in strength between levels is usually retained and you get absurd scenarios like a level 100 character towering over level 90 characters, but level 90 characters also tower over level 80 characters, but... You get the idea.
Are we going to explore the implication of fighters basically being ants compared to other fighters met later in the game?

Are you trying to say the high strength scores should be reflected by the size of the character model? Honestly, that's a really neat idea, but it's also fine to attribute it to some innate divinity or similar. Hercules didn't have to be a hundred feet tall to have his strength. Player characters usually aren't normal people.

No you dork, I don't mean towering that literally.

Well, in that case, I don't see the problem. Yes, a character ten levels higher than another should be exceedingly more powerful. That's the whole point of levels: they represent degree of power. If your issue is that the level 100 guy is just too powerful to make sense in the setting, then that's an issue of power scaling having gotten out of hand. Either the level cap should be dropped significantly or the degree of power each level represents should be reduced. If neither are an option, then the setting itself can be adjusted to accommodate. There are settings that can handle such characters; the main thing is that the scale of the adventures must change, too. Just as such characters shouldn't be troubled by random forest mobs, they also shouldn't be sent on fetch quests or to save the local village. Their deeds should shape the fate of kingdoms, continents, or whole worlds.

[Tangerine]

Are you trying to say the high strength scores should be reflected by the size of the character model? Honestly, that's a really neat idea,

Fable had your model change based on your stats. It's as neat as you think.

[rusty_shackleford]

A level 20 character can defeat armies of level 10 characters.

3 Olympian fencing masters VS 50 opponents!!!

[MeatEatingStork]

Anyway he talked about one where the enemies would get stronger if they killed a player.

Ragnarok Online had something similar but much lesser, where enemies would level (repeatedly) on killing a player. AFAIK it never really mattered except when people intentionally fed a single monster repeatedly to level it up so it would gank unsuspecting noobs, but it was a fun concept.

The real question is. Why arent they dying?
We cant walk 2 meters outside of town before we get attacked by goblins or wolves. How the **** are these people alive?

Fable 2 had a neat but only partial explanation to this. In one quest you're hired to accompany a monk into a cave, juuuuuuust in case, even though it's supposed to be only monks in there. The two of you are mobbed instantly and constantly by ravening skeletons, and your fat companion mentions that two monks would be absolutely eaten alive in there. She eventually realizes that only monks are supposed to go in because monks are of serene mind, and therefore do not bring a tidal wave of sins in with them. You, as a professional murderhobo, are wreathed in war and carnage.

That said there are bandits every ten feet along every major road and they've gotta be eating something, so it still doesn't work all the way.

Final Fantasy often explains this by saying cities have magical barriers around them, usually powered by crystals, that keep out monsters. I think it works well as a world-building element.

Okay but how are they farming? Most JRPGs are zombie apocalypse levels of infested with mutant wolves and clockwork jesters, that's gonna make it hard to get anything done.

[Sinfield]

A level 20 character can defeat armies of level 10 characters.

3 Olympian fencing masters VS 50 opponents!!!

Halo - Betrayal Sound Effect

Fencing is a weird sport where a newcomer that never fenced before has a shot at beating a master because they're unpredictable, but a apprentice that's been training for some time will always lose.

[logincrash]

Fencing is a weird sport where a newcomer that never fenced before has a shot at beating a master because they're unpredictable, but a apprentice that's been training for some time will always lose.

If you can be beaten by some ****** with a stick spazzing out at you because he's "unpredictable," you're not a master of fencing.

[WhiteShark]

Final Fantasy often explains this by saying cities have magical barriers around them, usually powered by crystals, that keep out monsters. I think it works well as a world-building element.

Okay but how are they farming? Most JRPGs are zombie apocalypse levels of infested with mutant wolves and clockwork jesters, that's gonna make it hard to get anything done.

I can't remember if there are any JRPGs that specifically answer that question, but it's easy enough to solve as a worldbuilder: just allow the barrier to extend far enough to protect some farmland or have dedicated barriers for farming communities. The fact that arable land will still be thus limited can work as the basis for conflict and storylines.

[rusty_shackleford]

I cast summon food and water.

[Oyster Sauce]

Video game worlds are condensed and omit the safe stretches of land while at the same time exaggerating enemy populations for gameplay purposes

[rusty_shackleford]

Video game worlds are condensed and omit the safe stretches of land while at the same time exaggerating enemy populations for gameplay purposes

I don't like this

[Oyster Sauce]

Video game worlds are condensed and omit the safe stretches of land while at the same time exaggerating enemy populations for gameplay purposes

I don't like this

Then I recommend Arcanum without fast travel

[rusty_shackleford]

Video game worlds are condensed and omit the safe stretches of land while at the same time exaggerating enemy populations for gameplay purposes

I don't like this

Then I recommend Arcanum without fast travel

No I don't want to walk thru it I want it to be implied to exist. I don't like 'seamless open worlds', I want a bunch of medium-sized areas loosely connected together. You can put the farm on the map I use to travel between them.

[Tweed]

Monsters in Asheron's Call could level up by killing players. This could actually be a problem where newbies either had to band together or find a stronger player to remove a monster than had become too strong to face alone.

[Stack of Turtles]

I don't like this

Then I recommend Arcanum without fast travel

No I don't want to walk thru it I want it to be implied to exist. I don't like 'seamless open worlds', I want a bunch of medium-sized areas loosely connected together. You can put the farm on the map I use to travel between them.

I genuinely want to walk through it.
I want to be able to take a day real time on a peaceful journey between two towns.
I want travel through dangerous regions to be a big deal because the journey is long enough to have a genuine point of no return and real risk that you won't make it through.
I want seeing the steeple of the town's church over the crest of the last hill to be something that makes you breathe a sigh of relief.

[Oyster Sauce]

I don't like this

Then I recommend Arcanum without fast travel

No I don't want to walk thru it I want it to be implied to exist. I don't like 'seamless open worlds', I want a bunch of medium-sized areas loosely connected together. You can put the farm on the map I use to travel between them.

The mostly open world is a big reason why I like WoW more than Guild Wars or FFXI(V). I dont wanna see a bunch of loading screens.

[rusty_shackleford]

I dont wanna see a bunch of loading screens.

people getting upset that they have to see half a second of a loading screen every 15-30 minutes is crazy, ruined entire games due to it

[Oyster Sauce]

I dont wanna see a bunch of loading screens.

people getting upset that they have to see half a second of a loading screen every 15-30 minutes is crazy, ruined entire games due to it

Just teleport from encounter to encounter like Blackguards then.

[rusty_shackleford]

I dont wanna see a bunch of loading screens.

people getting upset that they have to see half a second of a loading screen every 15-30 minutes is crazy, ruined entire games due to it

Just teleport from encounter to encounter like Blackguards then.

but I want to be able to explore fully fleshed out areas instead of some condensed interpretation of it

[MeatEatingStork]

I genuinely want to walk through it.
I want to be able to take a day real time on a peaceful journey between two towns.
I want travel through dangerous regions to be a big deal because the journey is long enough to have a genuine point of no return and real risk that you won't make it through.
I want seeing the steeple of the town's church over the crest of the last hill to be something that makes you breathe a sigh of relief.

This sounds amazing the first time and like being stuck in traffic every time thereafter.

[SpellSword]

A level 20 character can defeat armies of level 10 characters.

3 Olympian fencing masters VS 50 opponents!!!

So close!