New "Dead Levels"

[Zaukrie]

What's sad about it? If people have fun doing it, what is sad about it? I genuinely do not understand that statement.

 

[carmachu]

I still disagree with their definition of a "dead level," so I can't say that I find this article too terribly useful. The author's view that gaining new spell levels is not significant is, in my opinion, flawed and represents a level of power gaming I do not agree with in the least.

I have to agree with that setiment.

 

[Grymar]

The benefits aren't combat related, and if they are they are extraordinarily minor, so I don't find them munchy at all. They are very cool ideas, IMO.

 

[trollwad]

My question is it worth the effort. I love some aspects of 3.5e but i already find it very cumbersome particularly above 10th level. Wont this just be more things to remember that arent really that great anyways

 

[Crothian]

What's sad about it? If people have fun doing it, what is sad about it? I genuinely do not understand that statement.

People were having fun before this too. It is sad that people feel they need almost worthless little abilities every level to have fun.

 

[Alzrius]

It is sad that people feel they need almost worthless little abilities every level to have fun.

This whole "it's sad" bit that people keep repeating comes off as horribly condescending. That's like saying "It's sad that people feel they need to have an avatar to feel like they have a cool internet handle," or "It's sad that people feel they need to donate to EN World to feel like part of the community."

It's sad that people feel the need to characterize opinions they don't agree with as being sad.

 

[Bad Paper]

I smooth out certain things that classes grant so they are less jarring of a change, e.g. the Dread Necromancer's DR and the Fleshwarper's accelerated grafting. (The latter takes all ten levels to fully kick in)

 

[Crothian]

This whole "it's sad" bit that people keep repeating comes off as horribly condescending. That's like saying "It's sad that people feel they need to have an avatar to feel like they have a cool internet handle," or "It's sad that people feel they need to donate to EN World to feel like part of the community."

It's sad that people feel the need to characterize opinions they don't agree with as being sad.

It's sad that you feel that way.

It's just an expression and just an opinion. The whole dead level problem was not a problem until Wizards wrote an article on it. Before that it was occasionally brought up dealing with prestige classes who get too much. But now that the dead levels are seen by Wizards to be weak all these classes that get cool things every level are no longer seen as too powerful but just right. It's an idea that has half assed thought about and defined. And that idea that now getting a cool ability every level is needed to have fun is just sad!

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

It's sad that everyone else doesn't play exactly the way I want them to. I pity you all, in the private hells you inhabit, wherein you think you're having fun, but aren't really. You poor, poor, deluded bastards.

 

[Bacris]

The whole dead level problem was not a problem until Wizards wrote an article on it. Before that it was occasionally brought up dealing with prestige classes who get too much. But now that the dead levels are seen by Wizards to be weak all these classes that get cool things every level are no longer seen as too powerful but just right. It's an idea that has half assed thought about and defined. And that idea that now getting a cool ability every level is needed to have fun is just sad!

Except that it was a problem for some classes. Blame PrC or class design all you want, Cleric, Wizard, and Sorceror were pointless to stay in past 5th level, unless you REALLY wanted turn undead or REALLY wanted improved familiars.

I have yet to use any of these dead level articles and still have fun with my characters with "dead levels", but why does it have to be said that simply introducing the concept is sad? Are we seeing the early 3.5 grognards come out of the woodwork? It's like complaining that TV has too many channels for the same price. "It's sad that people today get 50 channels for $19.99 a month. I had 5 channels and I was happy with it!" Doesn't mean you have to watch them.

And nothin against you, Crothian, just that your post closest match what I wanted to rebutt