Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 7476458" data-attributes="member: 97077">As I recall, there are two main answers more or less to things I've stated I don't understand:1. Level disparity makes it so some PCs can't meaningfully contribute.2. I dunno, feelings or something.For 2, I got nothing. However poorly I might view someone who looks at a fellow player with a better attendance record and, as a result, a higher-level character with resentment, that's just a person I choose not to play with (as [MENTION=6812658]Seramus[/MENTION] helpfully pointed out). Or generally associate with on any level whatsoever. That can be set aside as a preference without a, let's call it, tangible justification.For 1, I simply disagree with that position. That was true in D&D 3e and 4e, but D&D 5e is designed in such a way where that's just not the case. AC and DCs doesn't scale up too high compared to other games. I pondered earlier whether this preference was based in part on assumptions brought in from other games which is a common thing in my experience. People treat the current edition of D&D like a previous edition of D&D all the time. Evidence of this can be seen on D&D forums frequently. Especially really experienced DMs. Based on what I've personally seen. I don't think it's out of line to speculate that may be a basis for some people's preference.My question, which remains unanswered, was whether you weighed this evidence for your conclusion against situations in which those same outcomes occurred with same-level PCs. Because those same outcomes that you pin on level disparity can certainly happen in other games that don't have PCs of disparate levels. We also don't know anything about the adventure design, the party tactics, the cohesion of the group, the fairness of the DM, etc. I'm not denying you had an experience. Rather, I'm questioning your conclusion based on that experience.It's not an insult to observe that you (1) have a preference and (2) came upon "evidence" that justified your preference and possibly ignored everything else other than that evidence. We should all guard against confirmation bias, don't you think? Maybe that's what's going on here. Maybe it's not. It's up for discussion.For my part, I had a preference for no XP and all PCs leveling up at the same time in D&D 3e and 4e which was based on level disparity being a pretty big problem in those games. That's not a big problem in D&D 5e. So I changed my approach. For this game.It's not dismissive to criticize or question a justification for a preference offered as fact, nor does that criticism or questioning dismiss the preference. I would say someone has to be greatly reading into things to conclude otherwise. I honestly don't care what you prefer with regard to how to award XP and whether you keep PCs at the same level. I'm trying to get at your stated justification for that preference, something you offered which doesn't hold water in my view.Now, if you feel your preference can't stand on its own once that justification is found to be in error, that's a different story. But that's on you to figure out. I'm perfectly fine with a preference being unjustified as I stated earlier in this post (and upthread as well).</blockquote>

Verification