Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="dave2008" data-source="post: 9639913" data-attributes="member: 83242">ER, thank you for taking the time to explain your position in your usual thorough detail. It is very much appreciated.I am going to agree to disagree. You don't think they are novice levels, and they may not fit your definition of novice levels, but you don't get to decided what "novice levels" means for everyone. I definitely consider levels 1-2 as novice and we added a 0-level (no class, just species and background).Those are interesting examples of novice levels, but that doesn't explain how people who don't want novice levels will find these palatable. My question was not how can you make novice levels, but how do you include novice levels for people who don't want them? For those people, the best answer is don't have them.I am familiar with incremental advancement (I am looking at it for my D&D heartbreaker), but I don't see how they transform something you dislike into something you like (which was the intent of may original comment). Maybe the next paragraphs will explain!I get your passion bleeding through this words - I love that!  However, IMO, your assertion that it is "entirely possible" is a very big hypothetical. It may work in your mind, but that is, IME, highly unlikely to satisfy everyone or even most D&D people (and by most D&D people I say the people on these forums has I have no idea what the border public things). People (again, EnWorld D&D people) complain all the time about things being included that they don't want included when they can literally just ignore it.  Heck, if didn't want novice rules (I do like them), I would be upset if they were as detailed and took up as much space as the standard rules. I might also be upset that they are called novice levels and not simply level 1-3 or whatever. You can't predict every scenario that is going to upset people and I don't see how providing more detailed and respectful rules of something people don't want making those people happy. Your solution could, instead of making Paul or Peter happy, make both Paul and Peter unhappy. Sometimes getting what you want is excluding what you don't want (I might even say a lot of the time form what I observe).</blockquote>

Verification