hong said:
Your opinion, my opinion. *I* think it's fun.
If I wanted to play someone who is already a totally awesome hero, I'd (1) play a higher-level campaign or a higher-level pick-up game or (2) play another RPG. If you're first-level, you're a beginner wizard just out of wizard school; you're an apprentice cleric; you're a footsoldier; that kind of stuff.
And then it becomes SO MUCH COOLER if you actually manage to live long enough to become a bad-ass.
D&D is actually sort of alone among RPGs in that the characters are so weak when they start out. But this is kind of a distinguishing point of D&D, and -- hmm, coincidentally -- D&D is the most popular RPG there is, so maybe it's *not* something that's turning away large numbers of players?
The fact that D&D is "level-based" is one of the strongest reasons for having the characters start out kinda weak. In a skill-based RPG, where your characters gain power slowly and super-incrementally, of course you start out more awesome. But in a level-based RPG, it doesn't make sense unless the characters start out weak and gradually become awesomer and awesomer. So then it just becomes a question of "what is the starting entry point for the game, become totally awesome?" I think the best entry point is "a competent newbie adventurer" rather than "some awesome badass hero who then becomes progressively more awesome."
Plus, this way the game supports two types of play, depending on your taste: low-level semi-realistic play where death is always an orc away (similar to Warhammer FRPG or whatever), and high-level epic play where the characters can do incredibly awesome things and teleport around and plane-shift and fight demons and come back from the dead (similar to Amber or some White Wolf game or another high-high-high-fantasy game of clashing powers).
I submit: (1) The mixture of these two kinds of play is a feature which makes D&D original. And (2) this is a good feature.
The feel of the game, and the kind of plots and character roles, is SUPPOSED to change as your level goes up. The only problem with this is all the math at higher levels in D&D3.x, when characters get 4 attacks per round, and so on. But that's a logistical problem, not a problem in the actual style of play. Of COURSE a game starring completely awesome dudes who have saved the kingdom a dozen times is going to play differently than a game starring some 1st-level schlubs who just have to guard a caravan and search the old abandoned temple for treasure!! All things are not scaleable, and one of those things is the mood and feel of the campaign. If all that changes is "now you're fighting 15 ogres and a giant instead of fighting 15 orcs and an ogre," then that's a problem.
Look, I can understand the desire for more heroic play. If that's the way D&D4e is, then oh well, I'll live; I'm enough of a game geek that I can find other games which I like to play. But "starting out weak and getting strong" is one of the main traits distinguishing D&D from all other RPGs. It's not "starting out strong and getting stronger."
