Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="cbatt" data-source="post: 359647" data-attributes="member: 1563">In the recent &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/ps/ps20020906a&quot;&gt;Wizards Personality Spotlight with James Wyatt and Rich Baker&lt;/a&gt; there is this following passage:&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;b&gt;Wizards: Based on the timeline you offer in the introduction, you seem to anticipate the adventure might take as much as two months’ game time to play out. What challenges does an adventure covering that much time present?&lt;/b&gt;&lt;b&gt;James:&lt;/b&gt; The biggest one is the problems involved in allowing characters a chance to spend their ill-gotten gains. Beyond that, you need to allow for events to progress beyond the immediate surroundings of the PCs, which is what that timeline is there for. It’s possible that if characters take too much time getting to the conclusion of the adventure, things could go very badly for the world at large. And it’s important for the players to realize that -- so they know that what they’re doing is important.&lt;/blockquote&gt;The adventure being discussed is &quot;City of the Spider Queen&quot; and from what I know, it takes PCs from 10th to 18th level.&nbsp; Judging by the above quote, that's 8 levels in 2 months of &lt;i&gt;game&lt;/i&gt; time.&nbsp; Extrapolating from that statement, it takes 5 game-months of solid adventuring to go from 1st through 20th level.&nbsp; Take into account significant downtime, and it seems reasonable to expect the average PC to advance to 20th level in under 2 game-years (even with the possibility of a few level draining encounters).No, this &lt;b&gt;is not&lt;/b&gt; a rant on &quot;munchkins&quot; or &quot;power gaming&quot; or whatever.&nbsp; I'm just really surprised by how quick that seems.&nbsp; I've been out of the 3e loop for many months now, so I'm wondering if this has become the standard rate of advancement in most campaigns?Do you think that the Epic Levels handbook has played any part in this viewpoint?Has it affected your game's advancement rate, if so how much?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="cbatt, post: 359647, member: 1563"] In the recent <a href="http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/ps/ps20020906a">Wizards Personality Spotlight with James Wyatt and Rich Baker</a> there is this following passage: <blockquote> Wizards: Based on the timeline you offer in the introduction, you seem to anticipate the adventure might take as much as two months’ game time to play out. What challenges does an adventure covering that much time present? James: The biggest one is the problems involved in allowing characters a chance to spend their ill-gotten gains. Beyond that, you need to allow for events to progress beyond the immediate surroundings of the PCs, which is what that timeline is there for. It’s possible that if characters take too much time getting to the conclusion of the adventure, things could go very badly for the world at large. And it’s important for the players to realize that -- so they know that what they’re doing is important. </blockquote> The adventure being discussed is "City of the Spider Queen" and from what I know, it takes PCs from 10th to 18th level. Judging by the above quote, that's 8 levels in 2 months of game time. Extrapolating from that statement, it takes 5 game-months of solid adventuring to go from 1st through 20th level. Take into account significant downtime, and it seems reasonable to expect the average PC to advance to 20th level in under 2 game-years (even with the possibility of a few level draining encounters). No, this is not a rant on "munchkins" or "power gaming" or whatever. I'm just really surprised by how quick that seems. I've been out of the 3e loop for many months now, so I'm wondering if this has become the standard rate of advancement in most campaigns? Do you think that the Epic Levels handbook has played any part in this viewpoint? Has it affected your game's advancement rate, if so how much? [/QUOTE]

Verification