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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ahnehnois" data-source="post: 5787267" data-attributes="member: 17106">I see this a lot. I won't deny that there's some validity to this perspective, but I will offer several counterarguments.There's two issues here; the lethality or the chance of failure, and the complexity of the rules. I think the case for simplicity is a lot stronger than the case for ease of success.First, easiness is not always assumed for beginners in every game. In many cRPGs, especially relatively open-world games, one can spend much of the lower levels running away and reloading save games due to frequent death. If you go outside the rpg world, it's quite common for beginner athletes to be 'hazed' by having an experienced player school them on the court/field/etc. Neither would I expect to show up at a poker table and have my competitors let me win. Going back to the world of rpgs, low resources and high lethality have often been assumed for low-level characters.Second, low-level D&D can be a great learning experience. Running out of spells and pulling out a crossbow teaches you the importance of resource management. Dying suddenly teaches you that your actions have consequences, that the world you're playing in is not built around you and can be arbitrary and capricious, and that character death is a natural and expected part of the game as it is of any adventure story. These are really important lessons for the players to learn, and it's best to learn them early before the players develop a sense of entitlement and start feeling like they're playing a game and not roleplaying.Third, since D&D has no clear endpoint and there is no way of winning, it's important to reward players. While there is a need to move on to new challenges, players of high-level characters should feel rewarded for having got there. The investment of time and energy they put into a high-level character should also be protected. Thus the game should be easier and less lethal to them than it was at 1st level. The converse can be very discouraging. If players gain a level only to have every challenge they might face grow correspondingly more difficult, what did they gain?***So while I agree that it's important not to scare off the beginners with excess challenge, I think the classic conception of low-level D&D was a real positive and should be maintained. As I explained above, it's easily avoided if you dislike it.***I'm all for 0 level, but why is it wrong for people who want competent, resilient characters to have to start at a high level? I do it all the time. It's fun. I don't think playing at level 1 is at all mandatory.</blockquote>

Verification