Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Baron Von Mandrick" data-source="post: 5934494" data-attributes="member: 3269">I'm late to the discussion, and unfortunately will probably ramble on far too much...It seems like a lot of the argument is over the minutia which isn't necessarily bad for things to discuss, but hopefully nobody will get upset or take things personally with that in mind.In AD&D first level was more dangerous, but that doesn't mean that characters weren't heroes.  I think part of the problem is different people are arguing about characters not being heroic enough when 10 people probably have 11 different ideas about what a hero actually is.The first level fighter who might only have 7 HP to start the campaign was titled a veteran.  So he already a background that included training, and experience thought not necessarily experience points.  It was fine to limit the powers, spells, abilities that characters had because all of that could increase as they leveled.  In a way I liked it then because I was starting out playing, and got powers when I as a player gained experience with the game, so my character and I were gaining experience more or less equally.I also didn't mind having more powers and skills and things by the time 4e came out because I was a more experienced player.In AD&D at a certain point our DM have us max HP's at first level.  At level 2 we got to roll 2 hit dice and take the best roll.  At level 3 we rolled, and the DM rolled a hidden die.  We could look at our roll and take our roll or take the hidden roll the DM rolled.  That in itself was fun, especially if you rolled a 5 or 6 and were sweating whether or not to choose the DM's die or your own.  But it also kept the characters alive a bit more early on, and kept the party from having guys that rolled well their first three levels while other members might have 3 poor rolls and then within the party there was a wide gap in HP's.Eventually our DM felt that we weren't first level players anymore, and we started out with the 3rd or 4th level characters partially because that's where we were in the campaign but it made sense that the characters were on par with the players.But even when our AD&D characters were first level and not given max hp's they were still above the common towns person.  The villager would have fewer hp's and not know any spells or anything like that because they were villagers.  They had interaction with the party, and our party could tell that we were above average from that interaction.  But when meeting nobles or career criminals or villains we saw that they too were above average which is why the villagers would be afraid of them and want a band of heroes to protect them.  It worked out.I like that there is a progression though and that power and abilities increase as characters level.  It's fun to know that you will get better, and have something to shoot for and room to grow.But within the criteria mentioned in the above paragraph I think people on different sides of the debate here could all play happily in the same gaming world.</blockquote>

Verification