Not true, IME.The starting point is irrelevant.
Yes, I was agreeing with you there - that was what I was trying to say about starting at level 0 vs lvl 4. You have a lot more experience at level 4. However, even starting out at level 0 the characters have a backstory that can heavily influence their character's "starting" point. At least that is what seems logical to me and how I run my games. It does matter where you start. A human who was raised by apes tends to look a bit different than one who grew up as an English LordYou could start at level 20 and even then the characters would in theory still be members of their species' populations, only with more abilities etc. acquired through experience and training.
Not true either (at least in my world). There is a huge range of is a "dwarf," just like there is a huge range of what makes a "human." At least that is the only way it feels authentic to me.Underneath all those levels a Dwarf would still be a Dwarf, just like all the other Dwarves.
I guess. I just no longer find that type of work enjoyable or fruitful for the actual campaign. As a DM I enjoy:True, you can't hit all the possibilities but you can go through a string of what-ifs and plan ahead for them, and take things learned/ruled on from previous campaigns and bring them forward or tidy them up or re-visit it for the new campaign.
- playing the game with my friends
- Making Monsters
- Making NPCs
Now, if you enjoy it and it benefits your group - great! It just has never really produce much if any benefit for me or my group. My group would never ask: "why is that dragon making a tail attack after each of our turns (legendary actions)?" or "why does that death knight's fireball do fire and necrotic damage?" - "why can't we do that?" These things just don't come up. They trust that if they want to do something outside the hard coded rules, they simply need to ask me and we will work it out.
Yes, but again I don't think that is much different from how we are currently playing and I still don't see the benefit of spending my time planning so much ahead. My 5e group is campaigning in the same homebrew world my 4e group did (so going on 14 years) with the same basic timeline. There was no need for us to tweak anything from the change in systems from 4e to 5e (and if you don't know - they are pretty different!), we just go with the flow and adjudicate things as they come up. We trust each other and work together. It is a beautiful thing!True, but when you've been running for 20 years before that you had that 20 years of experience to draw on beofre this campaign began. (this is one huge advantage of using the same system long-term: rules and rulings from one campaign can - if desired - carry forward into the next, or be tweaked/refined to suit if they didn't work out that well)
Again, if it is something you enjoy - great. I just think, from this side of the screen and without really knowing you, you seem to come off as asserting there is s certain superior way things have to be: PCs must have access to everything an NPC can do, Monsters must cast spells the same way as PCs, there must be internal consistency, etc. IME, those things just aren't necessary (at least not to the extent you seem to champion).