Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7833942" data-attributes="member: 996">I'm not going to argue how you may feel about it - &quot;difference&quot; vs &quot;disparity,&quot; here, is just a matter of connotation.&nbsp; Nor is it the only issue inherent in the system that contributes to less functional play at the lowest levels, and at higher levels. One of the smart things 5e did was tune the exp progression to speed through those lowest levels, and extend play in that preferred mid-level sweet spot.To the extent that both are present and not extricable, an unsupportable assumption.&nbsp; You could opine that both might play a factor, of course.&nbsp; But we'd need to look at a circumstance where they weren't correlated.There was one, of course, but it's so obscured by controversy I doubt it'd be useful.Then again, what play has represented in the story sense, at different levels has arguably changed, some, over the decades.&nbsp; In 1e, it was assumed you'd become feudal land lords and organized crime bosses and cult leaders and the like, by double-digit levels.&nbsp; In 3e there was no such assumption, you continued as adventurers through all 20 levels.There was no significant change in the lack of popularity of high level play.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7833942, member: 996"] I'm not going to argue how you may feel about it - "difference" vs "disparity," here, is just a matter of connotation. Nor is it the only issue inherent in the system that contributes to less functional play at the lowest levels, and at higher levels. One of the smart things 5e did was tune the exp progression to speed through those lowest levels, and extend play in that preferred mid-level sweet spot. To the extent that both are present and not extricable, an unsupportable assumption. You could opine that both might play a factor, of course. But we'd need to look at a circumstance where they weren't correlated. There was one, of course, but it's so obscured by controversy I doubt it'd be useful. Then again, what play has represented in the story sense, at different levels has arguably changed, some, over the decades. In 1e, it was assumed you'd become feudal land lords and organized crime bosses and cult leaders and the like, by double-digit levels. In 3e there was no such assumption, you continued as adventurers through all 20 levels. There was no significant change in the lack of popularity of high level play. [/QUOTE]

Verification