Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ariosto" data-source="post: 5421656" data-attributes="member: 80487">That's not the idea.Everything is "level appropriate" for someone!Dave Arneson came up with levels in the first place so there could be something for everyone. The Superheroes and Wizards could find Balrogs to deal with, while the weaker figures could have a range of challenges better suited to them.If all you've ever got is the same handful of people in lockstep, then you could run the game like a video game with sequential levels, I guess. I'm not sure what kind of world that would be; it might (depending on your setup) get pretty bizarre in terms of role-playing. Adequate variety for a touch of strategic interest, though, probably involves only a portion of the range of possibilities.TIME is another important element in the "bang for buck" of a wider and richer playing field versus a more constrained one. In board games, it takes a lot more than a single day to get the full value out of something like Empires in Arms or Pacific War (although one can play very engaging limited scenarios using the latter). Something like Ogre or Illuminati or Nuclear War can certainly hold interest for replays, but it's basically a way to pass an hour or several -- not real-time years!</blockquote>