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: 5877753" data-attributes="member: 17106">I think the issue with high-level spells (like harm, which is basically the same in 2e and 3.0) is not that people were using them more, but that there was a change in culture. The more codified and consistent rules encouraged a sense of "fairness" and suddenly people began to feel entitled to a type of balance and a level of survivability that was not previously expected. I do not think it is simply because more people were playing at high levels (though I have no way to be sure and relatively limited 2e experience).I do not know what 2e's rate of advancement assumptions were, but even if 3e speeded them up, that affected only people who used them. Given some of the polls and posts on this forum, I doubt most people ever used XP/CR as written; most DM's are perfectly comfortable determining their own rate of advancement. I would hope that 5e would take the PF approach (giving three different XP tables for three different speeds of advancement) and make it even more customizable. They've also said that their leveling system will be easy to opt out of (as all of them are).From a design perspective, I think the only thing WotC needs to do here is give people the tools to determine how they want to play things. They may suggest a style, but I certainly hope they don't assume one.So what would you suggest as being the default design assumption that all of us should bend to (or do you agree with my contention that there is wide variability in these sorts of things)?</blockquote>

Verification