Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
Playing the Game
Play by Post
Living Worlds
Living 4th Edition
proposal: higher level additional characters
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tenchuu" data-source="post: 5300399" data-attributes="member: 85539"><p>The 3rd character variant would be of no benefit to me, because I don't want to play three characters while I am DMing; DMing takes up a LOT of my time, and I just don't think I could do it and run three PCs. </p><p></p><p>The proposal as originally proposed would be nice, in that when I do create a second character, it could be at a significantly higher level. As of right now, I'd have to DM for 6 months to start my #2 at level 2. With this proposal, I could start him at level 4. </p><p></p><p>However, I do see a possible problem in that, if passed, members would be more likely to recruit privately for a new game (finding players they like, and agreeing to a level everyone can hit). Maybe that's bad, maybe it's not. It all depends how the judges want new games formed. </p><p></p><p>[sblock=Tangential thoughts possibly inappropriate for this thread]</p><p>I think EB is trying to address a larger issue with this proposal. So, what's really the issue trying to be addressed? Here are my guesses:</p><p></p><p><strong>1. A number of players want a mechanism to play at higher levels / different tiers. </strong>If this is the case, then probably an entirely different proposal should be put in place to define what requirements you must reach to be able to start a new character off at 11 and/or 21.</p><p></p><p>Or is it:</p><p></p><p><strong>2. Since games run at different paces, players are not gaining EXP evenly/balanced. </strong>One of EB's comments seemed to hit home on this point. If you're lucky and you get a fast-paced DM and player group, you will level much faster than someone who is in a group with slow posters. Since it's a living setting, that's kind of unfair (Time XP attempts to fix this, but it is insufficient). In some ways, this proposal is trying to address that by allowing a slow-post-affected player to start another PC above level 1, and perhaps balancing it out. But since fast-posters would get the same benefit, a slow-post-affected player would still be stuck behind. A better proposal to address this issue would be to change the ratio on time EXP so that time actively playing more heavily impacts XP (perhaps even to the point that adventuring is a treasury oriented activity, with Time XP as the only XP source).</p><p>[/sblock]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tenchuu, post: 5300399, member: 85539"] The 3rd character variant would be of no benefit to me, because I don't want to play three characters while I am DMing; DMing takes up a LOT of my time, and I just don't think I could do it and run three PCs. The proposal as originally proposed would be nice, in that when I do create a second character, it could be at a significantly higher level. As of right now, I'd have to DM for 6 months to start my #2 at level 2. With this proposal, I could start him at level 4. However, I do see a possible problem in that, if passed, members would be more likely to recruit privately for a new game (finding players they like, and agreeing to a level everyone can hit). Maybe that's bad, maybe it's not. It all depends how the judges want new games formed. [sblock=Tangential thoughts possibly inappropriate for this thread] I think EB is trying to address a larger issue with this proposal. So, what's really the issue trying to be addressed? Here are my guesses: [B]1. A number of players want a mechanism to play at higher levels / different tiers. [/B]If this is the case, then probably an entirely different proposal should be put in place to define what requirements you must reach to be able to start a new character off at 11 and/or 21. Or is it: [B]2. Since games run at different paces, players are not gaining EXP evenly/balanced. [/B]One of EB's comments seemed to hit home on this point. If you're lucky and you get a fast-paced DM and player group, you will level much faster than someone who is in a group with slow posters. Since it's a living setting, that's kind of unfair (Time XP attempts to fix this, but it is insufficient). In some ways, this proposal is trying to address that by allowing a slow-post-affected player to start another PC above level 1, and perhaps balancing it out. But since fast-posters would get the same benefit, a slow-post-affected player would still be stuck behind. A better proposal to address this issue would be to change the ratio on time EXP so that time actively playing more heavily impacts XP (perhaps even to the point that adventuring is a treasury oriented activity, with Time XP as the only XP source). [/sblock] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Playing the Game
Play by Post
Living Worlds
Living 4th Edition
proposal: higher level additional characters
Top