Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Desdichado" data-source="post: 2570024" data-attributes="member: 2205">Errr... I'm not saying that they're claiming that I can't have fun in a low level game; I'm claiming that they're saying low level precludes a number of interesting campaign types.&nbsp; That's what I disagree with; I think anything worth doing can be done at any level you choose.There's also the implication that the game isn't interesting unless foes aren't earth-shattering.&nbsp; An orc barbarian isn't as interesting as a balor.&nbsp; Why the heck not?&nbsp; I think that implication betrays a common crutch used by many DMs--substituting variety of foes for actual interesting set-ups.&nbsp; There's no reason why the manipulative BBEG who's plots have plagued the PCs for months or years of gametime has to be a high CR demon when a relatively modest mid-level human expert or aristocrat could pull off the exact same thing.&nbsp; The far end of that spectrum is convoluted Monte Cookisms; every single monster has a level of cleric, or rogue, or psion, or this or that template, etc. because tweaking mechanics of foes is the only thing that makes the game interesting, apparently?!&nbsp; &nbsp; <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/paranoid.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":uhoh:" title="Paranoid&nbsp; &nbsp; :uhoh:" data-shortname=":uhoh:" /> If your game is really and truly interesting, it's probably not because of the level, it's probably because it's intrinsically so.&nbsp; I realize that's a bit of a misnomer; nothing is intrinsically interesting, because it depends on the taste and preferences of those who interact with it, but hopefully you see what I'm trying to get at.Well, that's one of the problems with this thread, which I've already obliquely noted.&nbsp; What exactly is &quot;low level?&quot;&nbsp; From some of the responses here, you'd think it meant 1st level only.&nbsp; To me 5th and below is low level.&nbsp; 6-10th is mid-level, 11-15th is high level and 16+ is &quot;I don't play that anymore&quot; level.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Desdichado, post: 2570024, member: 2205"] Errr... I'm not saying that they're claiming that [i][b]I[/b][/i] can't have fun in a low level game; I'm claiming that they're saying low level precludes a number of interesting campaign types. That's what I disagree with; I think anything worth doing can be done at any level you choose. There's also the implication that the game isn't interesting unless foes aren't earth-shattering. An orc barbarian isn't as interesting as a balor. Why the heck not? I think that implication betrays a common crutch used by many DMs--substituting variety of foes for actual interesting set-ups. There's no reason why the manipulative BBEG who's plots have plagued the PCs for months or years of gametime has to be a high CR demon when a relatively modest mid-level human expert or aristocrat could pull off the exact same thing. The far end of that spectrum is convoluted Monte Cookisms; every single monster has a level of cleric, or rogue, or psion, or this or that template, etc. because tweaking mechanics of foes is the only thing that makes the game interesting, apparently?! :uhoh: If your game is really and truly interesting, it's probably not because of the level, it's probably because it's intrinsically so. I realize that's a [i]bit[/i] of a misnomer; nothing is intrinsically interesting, because it depends on the taste and preferences of those who interact with it, but hopefully you see what I'm trying to get at. Well, that's one of the problems with this thread, which I've already obliquely noted. What exactly is "low level?" From some of the responses here, you'd think it meant 1st level only. To me 5th and below is low level. 6-10th is mid-level, 11-15th is high level and 16+ is "I don't play that anymore" level. [/QUOTE]

Verification