A slightly different tack to level squatting

Remove all ads!

It seems that level squatting has turned from a barely acceptable loophole to a complete no-no, but I'd like to raise a debate that follows a slightly different approach.
The revised JUPP states a number of reasons for level squatting and I can think of 2 that the don't follow those reasons.

1.
I've seen on forums/sites/imagination of people who play through "low-level" parties. Loonies or geniuses - its up to you. But I would term this a "non-cheat" version of level squatting, i.e. you never actually level up. In terms of PnP, would this not be the same (but the opposite side of the coin) to those who use level squatting for advantageous purposes?
If you extend this idea of playing low level parties to your regular game - and ignore the advantageous purposes in XP it brings - would the use of delibrate level squatting present more of a challenge for veterans of the game, in certain chapters?
I suppose the argument could be that one section would be harder and the next would be easier. In theory, the game would balance itself out - and it would be considered cheating if done because you find the next section difficult, but I'd be interested to know peoples' opinions on this idea.

2.
First of all, I must mention that I rarely have Sorcerers in any party I play anymore (nor clerics!), so i must depend on Bards, Wizards and Druids for my high level magic. Secondly, I don't usually play with 6 characters, so in the early parts, I am 1-2 levels higher at various points in the game than the game designers considered. Therefore, what I am saying is based upon this, not a 6-person party with sorcerers and clerics on board.
So my first statement I have to say is that I have been known to "level squat" my main wizard. This is not for XP purposes - it is either laziness, forgetfulness, or what is to follow. You see, I've found levelling up a wizard doesn't usually give as great a benefit as levelling up as a sorcerer. Sure you get up to 4 hit points, some skill points and some saving throw bonuses per level (and 5 levels gains a feat), but the point of spell-casting is the spells (duh!).
If you've ever tried playing only with a wizard, you find the entire Wandering Village > Underdark section leans more heavily towards the hack and slash affair than a more balanced spells+slashing one. From a PnP perspective, why be able to cast 5th-6th level spells when there are none available to cast?

The last question is not strictly true in terms of IWD2 - there are a few spells that can be bought/found. They just are not the ones you would normally use. This produces 3 possibilities:

1. It makes the wizard quite redundant after casting the 1st-4th level spells - you tend to use more of them to be useful, which usually means more resting between ares/battles (to regain those spells);
2. It forces you to use "unused" spells, thus chaging the way you think of those formerly "useless" spells. This is no bad thing;
3. It turns the game more into hack n' slash, thus changing how you originally planned your characters. Again, this is no bad thing - after all, real life isn't linear either.

I suppose this 2nd point is not really about level squatting as such, but more about the lack of "auto-balancing" with availability of scrolls for wizards. But it does raise a question I thought may be more interesting than the usual level-squatting debates.

 

Interesting question.

Although you ARE technically breaking the rules when level-squatting, it's not really any different than imposing self-made rules to make the game more challenging. Solo, Ironman, Poverty, what have you.

A variant of this challenge would be competing in how many experience points one can accrue during one playthrough. You'd never want to level past 3, for example. Naturally you'd have to make rules so that you can't repeatedly kill respawning monsters - worg riders in the Horde Fortress, undead in the Fell Wood etc. as that'd just become a test of endurance.

 

I'm all for making mages more combat-worthy. There are a number of minor adjustments worth considering, which enable mages to gain a lot in melee, at a minimum of sacrifice. Off the top of my head:
- A feat in martial weapons.
- Expertise
- Armoured Arcana (a single feat enable safe usage of bucklers, which can mean up to +4AC, so it's like Expertise without the AB penalty)
- A level ranger for dual-wielding
- A level paladin for sorcerers
- A level monk for pal1/sorcX (Powerful, charisma-augmented Evasion)
- 2 levels rogue for wizards (Evasion + lots of class skillpoints)

When planning ahead for Heart of Fury mode, it's beneficial to add a bit of 'versatility' to your mages.

 

Yes, I have done similar things in the past, e.g. a high strength mage, but the question was raised because the purpose of the wizard I am using is what most people normally use a sorcerer for - a blaster with some ranged weapons fire. She is a Tiefling, so Rogue levels would be ideal, but I'd like to hold off on doing that for the moment.