Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5125088" data-attributes="member: 4937">Arguably, yes.&nbsp; But as these terms have no precise meanings, the fact that any particular term can be argued for doesn't really prove anything.As I said, it is going to depend on how you define 'complete'.&nbsp; I certainly feel that most of the rules regarding high level play ought not really impact most campaigns.&nbsp; You don't technically need rules for 20th level wizards, there spells, and the sort of challenges that they are to face if you are content to pace the game such that no one ever reaches 20th level.&nbsp;&nbsp; I personally am content to spend years reaching 15th level (and have).&nbsp; But I suspect that a fairly significant block of players raised up on cRPG style adventures where the high levels are 'the good stuff' and looking for a clear end game and climax is going to balk at this idea.Which isn't necessarily to say that the division of the rules along level and styles of play is by any means a bad one, just that by some common definitions of 'complete', if you divide the rules up the peices are not complete.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 5125088, member: 4937"] Arguably, yes. But as these terms have no precise meanings, the fact that any particular term can be argued for doesn't really prove anything. As I said, it is going to depend on how you define 'complete'. I certainly feel that most of the rules regarding high level play ought not really impact most campaigns. You don't technically need rules for 20th level wizards, there spells, and the sort of challenges that they are to face if you are content to pace the game such that no one ever reaches 20th level. I personally am content to spend years reaching 15th level (and have). But I suspect that a fairly significant block of players raised up on cRPG style adventures where the high levels are 'the good stuff' and looking for a clear end game and climax is going to balk at this idea. Which isn't necessarily to say that the division of the rules along level and styles of play is by any means a bad one, just that by some common definitions of 'complete', if you divide the rules up the peices are not complete. [/QUOTE]

Verification