Dead Levels

"If a game has dead levels, then it is a flawed design."

The number of times I hear that statement repeated on D&D YouTube is starting to sound like the annoying yapping of tiny dogs. It sounds entitled, almost spoiled, and it assumes players are only playing these games to accumulate power. I recently heard this tossed at Worlds Without Number, and it is just a really lame argument in the context of a larger game and experience.

These people have not played a BX fighter to level 14, have they?

You, Sir, get NOTHING!

The point of dead levels is to force the referee to think about alternate rewards players can get, without giving them too much, without making players feel they "already got something this level," and without holding back an external, social, or other intangible award or power. Magic items, weapons, or armor? A social rank allowing the character to request help or get special resources? Favors? Contacts? Even a supernatural ability, the referee "just gives" the character —like danger sense, an ability score modification, an innate spell, or some other special bonus — that could have a limit per day.

Dead levels are breathing room and opportunities for the referee to introduce alternate rewards.

They are not design flaws.

I swear the 5E and Pathfinder 2E generations are being indoctrinated with "rules as written" being god. You get nothing unless the book says you get it, or else you are breaking the game, upsetting the designers, embarrassing yourselves on YouTube, and ruining the experience for everyone. I have seen people like this argue against homebrew because "it ruins the game for everyone, and we are not playing by a standardized set of rules anymore."

What are they talking about? These people have not played old-school games, and I fear that if they did, they would slavishly adhere to the books and rules-as-written and still fail to understand how the game is supposed to be played.

"But I expect to get something every level!"

Games are spoiling us; we feel entitled to "get something every level," and the game slowly drifts away from being about story, character, exploration, and the world—and becomes more about the build, rules, exploits, power gaming, and what is allowed within the book. If you give characters too much power, the game breaks, and play drags to a crawl since higher levels need to scale hit points.

I don't want the book or a level chart to be the master of my destiny.

I want my choices to be.

Dead levels are a design feature, not a flaw. They let the level chart relax and deemphasize the constant need to be "fed something" at every level. Stop treating level systems as a Skinnerian approach that requires rewards at every milestone. It is a lame design, and advancement can mean something much more profound than just "what the books give you."

Many make Worlds Without Number their core fantasy system, playing only this game after game, and it is a great book. There is a trivial difference between a 1d6 skill system in BX and the 2d6 skill system in the WN games, except that we have a bell curve and can have a more meaningful skill level and modifier system. I prefer 2d6 skills, since it makes them fundamentally different than "just another d20 roll" and highlights we are doing something other than "rolling to kill." Putting the entire system "on one die" can make every roll feel the same.

The Kevin Crawford WN games are classics, easily masterpieces, and outstanding solo experiences.

One book can generate an entire world.