Instead of using a fixed percentage as xp-loss you could just take away the xp the player gained since his last level-up. This is more convenient when you need to tweak xp-requirement for different levels, and it gives players better risk-control.

I have to say these are some good points (no pun intended) to think about. But for now I think the de-leveling process with just be in experience and a few level calculations.

(Though, as an aside I hate random hitpoints...

As programming goes this is a pain to track because it is random and very difficult to predict. I've decided on a simple hit point calculation which is the players constitution +5. This makes the calculations a lot easier to do between levels. I had added random hit points so it would give a different kind of feeling for the game but now that I've added this building a tank type character is a choice a player can make. Instead of allowing fate to decide players can make the effort to build the juggernaut character that can take quite the beating and keep on playing.

Instead of using a fixed percentage as xp-loss you could just take away the xp the player gained since his last level-up. This is more convenient when you need to tweak xp-requirement for different levels, and it gives players better risk-control.

I never though about it this way. So the way to look at it then is if you die you lose your current level experience which would technically only affect your game standings on the ladder. Thanks for the idea I'll have to think about it some more and maybe even try implementing it since it would be very easy to do.

The issue seems to be that you give random stat points to use per level up. Don't do that. It's a nightmare for players with OCD tendencies and doesn't add anything of value to the game. I've played good games that I ended up hating because I had to spend more time resetting than actually playing them because of random stuff like that. If you give the player N stat points per level up then it would be simple to just remove N points from random stats whenever the player dies.

The issue seems to be that you give random stat points to use per level up. Don't do that. It's a nightmare for players with OCD tendencies and doesn't add anything of value to the game. I've played good games that I ended up hating because I had to spend more time resetting than actually playing them because of random stuff like that. If you give the player N stat points per level up then it would be simple to just remove N points from random stats whenever the player dies.

Yep already stopped using random values. The reason I was thinking in programming terms "versioning" their level was to revert the stats they had added and not "Use random to decided their fate". My original goal was to make it so if the game deleveled their character when they gained enough experience to level back up those numbers would then be restored by the game without them having to exert the effort to re-assigning the points to their character.

In some ways this seemed like me being nice to the player but as several posts pointed out it was just down right cruel to take so much away from the player. In the end I've dropped this idea and moved to a simple penalty that if they player dies then they get a choice, pay to resurrect their player, or lose all the experience points since the last time they leveled up. It's now their choice to what they will lose.

In MMOs, EverQuest also had de-leveling (or maybe it was DAoC?) - you'd lose roughly 20% of the experience bar, which could take you back down a level. I'm not sure if it really added anything of value, design-wise.

Clearly it's an attempt to give significance to death. But I always get stuck here - most death consequences in game is a half-hearted attempt are making players fear death, but ends up only being a nuisance. Only permadeath is actually significant enough - but then we back down and say, "oh, but death shouldn't be that extreme!", because we still want the game to be fun for players (and permadeath is fun for some niche groups).

So I feel like, if I am making a game, and permadeath is too 'extreme', then why settle for 'annoying'? Why not making the game challenging, but make death nothing more than losing that challenge and returning to the last safe location (e.g. back to town)?

For some games, having zero or near-zero consequence to death works very well, and even lets the designer crank up the challenge. VVVVVV is one example.

I'm not saying there so be zero consequences entirely in the game - it just isn't required to be centered on death. I'd like to try giving very serious consequences to player choices, instead of accidental missteps, and see where that takes the design.

[/half-formed-thoughts]