Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9740697" data-attributes="member: 6790260">But that's not what it is.Using completely made-up numbers: One thing starts at 10 and grows to 30. The other starts at 1, and grows so that between (say) 4 and 8, the two are pretty close together (intersecting at 6, where both are 16), only to then shoot off to 3000 by level 20.Yes, during that narrow window, the two things are, say, within +/-5 or whatever--a pretty loose balance, but something vaguely approximating it nonetheless. Before that, at the lowest levels, the linear-scaler is so much better it isn't even funny--starting out literally ten times better. But afterward? The linear scaler becomes completely irrelevant.And yes, I genuinely do believe this accurately describes multiple editions of D&D. It describes 3rd edition the best, but it describes all of them except 4e to enough of a degree to have a valid point.Sounds like you're taking away from the player the thing they actually enjoyed doing, so that you can make someone else ridiculously powerful.Doesn't sound like particularly good game design.Which is a bad assumption to make.</blockquote>