A party can definitely be too powerful for the narrative you want to tell. If you’ve got a specific story with specific challenges in mind, then players can have abilities that can render those challenges moot.
Using Pathfinder as an example, but this would apply to several related systems too: You have some kind of ravine or other traversal challenge. Prior to gaining access to fly, the players need to use their skills to find whatever solution you’ve seeded into the world or come up with some creative solution you haven’t thought of yet. After gaining access to fly, they can simply fly across, nullifying the challenge.
All this is to say that in certain systems, it’s not simply the numbers but the nature of challenges that change as you gain power. A high-level party tells different stories than low-level parties (this isn’t an accident, it’s a feature), and if that’s not the kind of story the GM wants to tell, it can be a problem. Arguably, however, that’s something the GM should have been aware of when going into a system like DnD or Pathfinder and been prepared to raise the stakes to entirely different kinds of challenges.
Arguably, however, that’s something the GM should have been aware of when going into a system like DnD or Pathfinder and been prepared to raise the stakes to entirely different kinds of challenges.
Which is the point I was going to make! I still say it’s on the GM to properly calibrate the story and/or player powers in the scenarios you outlined but overall I agree with you. I just think if a GM is trying to tell a very specific story/narrative then they should outline when each power rise occurs but that enters into railroading imo. Which at that point my advice would just be to write a book if they want THAT much control over the narrative since the players would have very little agency to alter the world around them. That’s just not fun for most players I’ve ran games for, they always want that extra agency to get wild and as a GM it’s always fun to see the unexpected and it keeps me on my toes.
GMs! Let your party be powerful if they figure out creative ways to achieve that power! It’s more fun for everyone!
Dude, this is a pretty bad outlook. Not the power creep stuff, although I’d hate that super hero nonsense at our table in any of our serious campaigns, but the idea that trying a story is rail roading. everyone, dm included, has a say in the kinda campaign you’re getting into and, once you’re in, you should stick to the kinda game you all agreed on.
A party can definitely be too powerful for the narrative you want to tell. If you’ve got a specific story with specific challenges in mind, then players can have abilities that can render those challenges moot.
Using Pathfinder as an example, but this would apply to several related systems too: You have some kind of ravine or other traversal challenge. Prior to gaining access to fly, the players need to use their skills to find whatever solution you’ve seeded into the world or come up with some creative solution you haven’t thought of yet. After gaining access to fly, they can simply fly across, nullifying the challenge.
All this is to say that in certain systems, it’s not simply the numbers but the nature of challenges that change as you gain power. A high-level party tells different stories than low-level parties (this isn’t an accident, it’s a feature), and if that’s not the kind of story the GM wants to tell, it can be a problem. Arguably, however, that’s something the GM should have been aware of when going into a system like DnD or Pathfinder and been prepared to raise the stakes to entirely different kinds of challenges.
Which is the point I was going to make! I still say it’s on the GM to properly calibrate the story and/or player powers in the scenarios you outlined but overall I agree with you. I just think if a GM is trying to tell a very specific story/narrative then they should outline when each power rise occurs but that enters into railroading imo. Which at that point my advice would just be to write a book if they want THAT much control over the narrative since the players would have very little agency to alter the world around them. That’s just not fun for most players I’ve ran games for, they always want that extra agency to get wild and as a GM it’s always fun to see the unexpected and it keeps me on my toes.
GMs! Let your party be powerful if they figure out creative ways to achieve that power! It’s more fun for everyone!
Dude, this is a pretty bad outlook. Not the power creep stuff, although I’d hate that super hero nonsense at our table in any of our serious campaigns, but the idea that trying a story is rail roading. everyone, dm included, has a say in the kinda campaign you’re getting into and, once you’re in, you should stick to the kinda game you all agreed on.