Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6561651" data-attributes="member: 996">Exp tables did level out with hundreds of thousand of exp as a level width for all classes around name level.&nbsp; More hundreds of thousands for a Cleric, Fighter or Magic-user than for a Thief, but still, quite a lot.&nbsp; Then again, the things a high-level party could handle were staggering, and xp awards were limited only by DM generosity.&nbsp; So, no, I don't think that was the main reason.&nbsp; &nbsp;Probably the same way:&nbsp; people will stop playing as the game starts to falter, and the long-standing 'preference' for lower-level play will once again be re-affirmed.I think the main reason high level play hasn't been hugely embraced is the 'sweet spot.'&nbsp; There's a period where you've gotten out of the being-too-fragile low levels, but casters haven't started totally dominating and the game hasn't mechanically collapsed.&nbsp; For most versions of D&amp;D, it's probably in the 3-10 range.I think 5e's sweet spot kicks in between 2nd and 5th (inclusive).&nbsp; 1st is definitely problematic, and that's very disappointing.&nbsp;&nbsp; Need more data to pin it down beyond that.&nbsp; I have a sinking feeling (ironically) that it might, as you suggest, be at least 4th.&nbsp; I don't see anything about the design to indicate it won't run into trouble in the low double-digits, just like most editions did, but I reserve judgment until I get to try it at much higher level - which may well be never if I keep running Encounters and AL...One very interesting thing about sweet spots, though - and I think anyone generating parties at higher levels to 'test' 5e out should keep this in mind - a character and party that level up from 1 to n as part of a campaign are probably going to experience a wider sweet spot than one that builds new characters to 'test' each level.&nbsp; For one thing, decisions you make at lower level are going to carry with you to higher levels. For another, you'll get to thoroughly understand the characters' abilities at lower levels before moving on, so they'll both be quick &amp; easy to use, and prone to be used more effectively rather than ignored in favor of 'testing' the top-level options.&nbsp; And, of course, you won't be 'optimized' at each level.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6561651, member: 996"] Exp tables did level out with hundreds of thousand of exp as a level width for all classes around name level. More hundreds of thousands for a Cleric, Fighter or Magic-user than for a Thief, but still, quite a lot. Then again, the things a high-level party could handle were staggering, and xp awards were limited only by DM generosity. So, no, I don't think that was the main reason. Probably the same way: people will stop playing as the game starts to falter, and the long-standing 'preference' for lower-level play will once again be re-affirmed. I think the main reason high level play hasn't been hugely embraced is the 'sweet spot.' There's a period where you've gotten out of the being-too-fragile low levels, but casters haven't started totally dominating and the game hasn't mechanically collapsed. For most versions of D&D, it's probably in the 3-10 range. I think 5e's sweet spot kicks in between 2nd and 5th (inclusive). 1st is definitely problematic, and that's very disappointing. Need more data to pin it down beyond that. I have a sinking feeling (ironically) that it might, as you suggest, be at least 4th. I don't see anything about the design to indicate it won't run into trouble in the low double-digits, just like most editions did, but I reserve judgment until I get to try it at much higher level - which may well be never if I keep running Encounters and AL... One very interesting thing about sweet spots, though - and I think anyone generating parties at higher levels to 'test' 5e out should keep this in mind - a character and party that level up from 1 to n as part of a campaign are probably going to experience a wider sweet spot than one that builds new characters to 'test' each level. For one thing, decisions you make at lower level are going to carry with you to higher levels. For another, you'll get to thoroughly understand the characters' abilities at lower levels before moving on, so they'll both be quick & easy to use, and prone to be used more effectively rather than ignored in favor of 'testing' the top-level options. And, of course, you won't be 'optimized' at each level. [/QUOTE]

Verification