Written by Peter Weilnböck
Published on: 2023-03-01
A look into power progression in TTRPG gaming
I have been fiddling with my own ttrpg system for a while, but still need to decide a few basic points. (Ok, to be honest, I have not decided anything really, so far.)
Since I recently was part of a long running campaign using Fantasy Flight Games “Genesys” system, I started to think again about some things that did not work so well for me in that system.
One thing in particular was the power progression. It seems like a lot of fun for short adventures, but once the game runs for quite some time the balance simply broke down. Also, I had the feeling of being boxed in, and that I could not develop the character further in a way that I liked.
This got me thinking: how does one design a good power progression, so that players can enjoy not only the role playing itself, but also how their characters develop over time.
The first big difficulty is how to define the power level. It is something that can be easily noticed in play, but is not necessarily easy to define in a formulaic way. For simplicity, I will assume for the rest of the discussion, that the power level can be condensed to a single number. At a later point I will try to expand a bit more about how this can be implemented in practice.
When looking at power progression there are three very basic considerations that need to be made:
While there are basically endless possibilities for the right shape, there are a few basic options:
For simplicity’s sake, I will use systems with levels as an example, even though I personally do not like levels as a design choice.
I will also assume that the levels are spaced out equally. So, that it takes roughly the same game time to get from level 2 to level 3 as from level 1 to level 2.
Using those assumptions the 3 progressions can be exemplified in the following way:
Accelerating:
| Level | Power |
|---|---|
| 1 | 1 |
| 2 | 2 |
| 3 | 4 |
| 4 | 8 |
Constant:
| Level | Power |
|---|---|
| 1 | 1 |
| 2 | 2 |
| 3 | 3 |
| 4 | 4 |
Decelerating:
| Level | Power |
|---|---|
| 1 | 1 |
| 2 | 2 |
| 3 | 2.5 |
| 4 | 2.75 |
Of course the shape can be a bit more refined, or maybe less refined depending on the point of view with e.g.: one of the basic shapes described above up to a certain cut of point.
Before going into different advantages and disadvantages, I also want to quickly explain the steepness of the power progression:
The steepness of power progression seems to be a bit easier to understand than the shape at the first glance, but it has some rather interesting implications. Especially combined with the starting point it can drastically change how the game feels. Do the PCs slowly progress from competent to exceptional beings? Do they start as incompetent fools that quickly rise to a power that equals divine beings?
I think the steepness of the progression is one of the things that separate a system that feels grounded in realism with one that is more high fantasy. There is nothing wrong with either approach, but I personally feel more inclined towards systems that remain grounded in realism, the reasons for which I explained in my blog post about scale in stories. (Alright I admit, I just rambled on about it, and did not really explain.)
Now that the basic building blocks of the power progression are defined, the next step would be to think about the advantages and disadvantages of the various combinations and than later on how to achieve the desired result.
In all successful TTRPGs that I know, there is at least some power progression. The PC learn new things and get more competent. The often vastly different approaches can not necessarily be divided into better or worse, but often simply serve very different design goals.
When the power progression is accelerating, any challenges for the players quickly become irrelevant. It facilitates campaigns of epic proportions, where the PCs leave normal human limits behind to challenge the gods, especially if it is a steep progression as well. For such an epic campaign the acceleration might be necessary, to overcome the vast power difference between normal humanoids and the most powerful beings of that world.
However, because of the accelerating nature, at some point there almost needs to be a cut off point, even if it just the end of the campaign.
It also means that the campaign can only be grounded in realism in the beginning, which is quickly left behind. And it also needs some explanation on how the society works in a world where humanoids can ascend like this - or an explanation on how the PCs are different.
Another benefit would be, that new players can slowly learn the ropes of the system, before the options and possibilities of the PCs start to explode.
Since such systems need to be rather restrictive in the beginning, since the power will only explode from there, I think that this is not really suited for short campaigns, since you might never reach a point where the potential of the PCs get realised. On the other hand, the upper limit of possible power also provides a natural end point of any campaign, since the PCs keep accelerating towards that goal.
In my opinion it also requires a supernatural element such as magic to explain such a progression, and non-magic characters might be either left behind or run the risk of breaking the verisimilitude.
Constant power progression might be the easiest to grasp and handle, since it is rather predictable. depending on the steepness, the epicness can be adjusted quite easily. There is still a need for scaling the threats accordingly to the current level of the players and you also still might run into the wall of maximum power, which enforces an end point to campaigns. Or at least strongly suggests and end point.
While it still has basically the same problems with regards to high power as the accelerating progression, those are far less pronounced, since the explosive growth does not happen in the same way. This however also means, that it is less suited for reality-changing campaigns.
Because of the linear nature, I think it is also particularly well suited for short campaigns, as well as starting at a higher level. Everything is a bit more controlled and manageable.
The decelerating power progression puts a focus on the beginning of campaigns. Especially in the beginning the PCs quickly become more competent, and start to surpass the NPCs in their surrounding. However, since the power increase becomes slower and slower, it also becomes rather difficult to completely shift the scale. While the very early threats loose relevance rather quickly, once the curve begins to flatten, the threats stay relevant for much longer.
This means that in my opinion this type of power progression is particularly well suited for long, open-ended campaigns. With opponents returning again much later, and still being a challenge. Because of the quick progression in the beginning, it also might be well suited for short, exploratory campaigns.
Many games that do not use character levels / character classes seem to fall into this category, since quite often buying a new level of a certain skill or attribute is more expensive than the level below.
I think it showed clear through my descriptions so far, that I prefer “down to earth” scenarios. It is much easier to have a consistent, believable world that way, and for me verisimilitude certainly is a factor in my ability to enjoy things. And this is more easily achieved with a decelerating curve.
Another important factor is, that the characters should be at least somewhat competent in what they do from the beginning, which also means that I lean towards flatter progression.
For me it also seems better, if there is no hard limit in how far a character can grow. A soft limit, enforced by available experience points is usually more than enough.
I think this blog article has run long enough for now, and specific mechanisms on how I would like the power progression to work (and what bothered me about Genesys, which is the reason for the whole article) need to wait for a separate post.