Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
11 spell levels... really
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Treebore" data-source="post: 6050187" data-attributes="member: 10177"><p>Really? Well I am glad your not on the design team. Scaling spells is not hard, even to spread them out over 30 levels instead of 18. As well as slowing down acquisition of them. </p><p></p><p>A large part of the problem with spell casters is not only how powerful the spells are, but how many of them can be cast. Slow down acquisition and power escalation and you make it easier to deal with the highest level spells.</p><p></p><p>If WOTC sticks with the current XP per level costs more games will get into the higher levels faster, and since they will be easier to deal with, and be more balanced with non spell casters, more DM's will actually run such games rather than stop them because they don't want to deal with the power level issues. So I think it would be very smart of WOTC to make higher level play more viable. The only way to do that is slow down power escalation and rules bloat. Spreading it all out over 30 levels would go a long ways towards making that happen.</p><p></p><p>So spread out the level 0 to 3 spells over the first 10 levels, spread out level 4 to 6 over the 11th to 20th levels, and the rest over the last 10.</p><p></p><p>Very possible, and relatively easy, to do.</p><p></p><p>Mearls has already addressed the challenges of higher level play, so if they want to make it more viable to run and play, they have to not front load the game so heavily, and spread out the power acquisition over more levels.</p><p></p><p>The question is, will it satisfy the people who "I want it NOW!" enough to have them become interested in playing a game, with the same character, for 30 levels instead of the 8 to 12 levels most game groups currently play? </p><p></p><p>With the current power escalations, most games never get into really high levels. Those of us who go above 12th level are the exception, not the rule. So why not design the game to make more games much more likely to go all the way? Make it so more players will actually get to see 9th level spells, rather than never see them because so many DM's never want to deal with them?</p><p></p><p>Personally I think its a no brainer to encourage more GM's to get into running games into the higher levels. That is not going to happen with the power scaling models of the previous 4 editions. A new model is clearly needed.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Treebore, post: 6050187, member: 10177"] Really? Well I am glad your not on the design team. Scaling spells is not hard, even to spread them out over 30 levels instead of 18. As well as slowing down acquisition of them. A large part of the problem with spell casters is not only how powerful the spells are, but how many of them can be cast. Slow down acquisition and power escalation and you make it easier to deal with the highest level spells. If WOTC sticks with the current XP per level costs more games will get into the higher levels faster, and since they will be easier to deal with, and be more balanced with non spell casters, more DM's will actually run such games rather than stop them because they don't want to deal with the power level issues. So I think it would be very smart of WOTC to make higher level play more viable. The only way to do that is slow down power escalation and rules bloat. Spreading it all out over 30 levels would go a long ways towards making that happen. So spread out the level 0 to 3 spells over the first 10 levels, spread out level 4 to 6 over the 11th to 20th levels, and the rest over the last 10. Very possible, and relatively easy, to do. Mearls has already addressed the challenges of higher level play, so if they want to make it more viable to run and play, they have to not front load the game so heavily, and spread out the power acquisition over more levels. The question is, will it satisfy the people who "I want it NOW!" enough to have them become interested in playing a game, with the same character, for 30 levels instead of the 8 to 12 levels most game groups currently play? With the current power escalations, most games never get into really high levels. Those of us who go above 12th level are the exception, not the rule. So why not design the game to make more games much more likely to go all the way? Make it so more players will actually get to see 9th level spells, rather than never see them because so many DM's never want to deal with them? Personally I think its a no brainer to encourage more GM's to get into running games into the higher levels. That is not going to happen with the power scaling models of the previous 4 editions. A new model is clearly needed. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
11 spell levels... really
Top