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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ratskinner" data-source="post: 5895593" data-attributes="member: 6688937">I think the bigger issue is that the power curve is undefined. That is, the "core" of D&D doesn't make very strong statements about what different levels mean in terms of the narrative assumptions. So what does 20th level mean to D&D? What does 10th or even 1st? Various editions have taken various stances on where you start! How can we expect them to figure out how you should end up?That's why I'm in favor of cutting back the levels in the "Basic" game. People seem to have a general consensus about that the "low" level game is supposed to look like. Some people want to start as heroes, others as a peasant with a sword/spellbook. I think we've heard that level 1 will be the classic start and that if you want to start heroic, just start at level 3. (I did a similar thing in 3.x and it worked great.) They seem to want themes to run for 6 levels, fine, let the basic game run to 12. That still leaves the heroic groups 9 level-ups before the basic game runs out.After that, though, there isn't such broad consensus on where things go. Some people want to head towards King Richard, others want to head toward Cu Cuchlain or Hercules. Also, most games seem to die out about there. People want to try different characters etc. So, for the folks who want it, let those groups choose between different high-level modules. Some will throw caster-martial balance out the window, others will have fighters cleaving mountains....whatever, I hardly ever play there. I think it's probably better to leave it to the experts. Play what you want, y'know.AD&D stopped at 10th? News to me. Low(er) level AD&D wizards had fewer spell slots and their use was a matter of some contention in most of the groups I was in. (Remember how fighters ruled the lower levels?) IIRC, the list of spells was a lot shorter, too. Nonetheless, as you headed up the spell levels toward Wish, the fundamental power level changed a lot. However, Wish is the perfect example, the DM was encouraged (or at least they all acted like they were) to pick apart almost any wish you could make and use it against you. Part of the motivation behind 3e's changes was that Wizard players rarely got to enjoy the fruits of their suffering at low levels by making it past 10th or so. It turned out to be an over-correction, IMO. Balance, though, especially across all the levels of 3 and 4 e, is in the eye of the beholder. I don't there's any objective or rational way to argue or determine how the upper reaches of the game should work. Let the people who want to play up there, do it. If you want CuChulain and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vainamoinen" target="_blank">Väinämöinen</a> to be remaking the world, go for it. However, we should also provide for the folks who want Ned Stark and Grand Maester Pycelle, and for the folks who want Croaker and the Lady, and for the folks who want Arthur and Merlin.</blockquote>

Verification