Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Recidivism" data-source="post: 5791607" data-attributes="member: 51740">I'm having trouble understanding exactly what OP is getting at, but I'm going to take a stab at a response.I feel like this is purely an issue from your vision of your setting contradicting the implied setting of D&D.I see no problem with say (3E), your peasant being a level 1 character, the farmer being a level 2+ expert, the militia man being a level 3+ expert/warrior, the bandit being a level 4+ expert/warrior/rogue, and the veteran soldier being a level 5+ warrior. In an ideal campaign I'd prefer for these to be even higher numbers.However the implied setting of D&D, especially say in 4E, goes with the idea that you can be fighting supernatural evils and running around with magic codpieces from level 1. It's pretty silly, because the trajectory is from "Superhuman" to "Godlike" at 20th-30th level. I have never seen a game go to high level where players attained that much power and the game didn't self-destruct narratively.I am very much in favor of a more G. R. R. Martin implied setting, where even the most skilled swordfighters might only be marginally better (not say, 20x better) than another and fighting the animated dead is a terrifying thing, not "Oh, a horde of level 1 skeletons & zombies. Snore!"</blockquote>