Revised (Slightly) Character Advancement Table

[Umbran]

In 1E/2E, I ran a campaign with the same players/characters for five years, playing every week with few exceptions, and in the end they ranged from 16th-19th levels. Are many newer players willing to put that kind of time into a character nowadays? Seems unlikely from my exposure, but I could be (and hope) I am wrong.

Here's the thing - 2e came out like 30 years ago!

I dunno about you. 30 years ago my needs and desires were different. The world around me was different. With a different world, and a different me, why would I expect to want the same sort of game experience?

 

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

Um, how? It does pretty much nothing elsewhere.

Um... it gets characters to higher levels faster. The same 100000 EXP worth of dangerous combat in the table RAW would be 12th, in mine they would be 13th. If you are going to argue longer times at lower levels is more lethal, shorter times at higher levels is less lethal (since it requires fewer encounters).

 

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

Here's the thing - 2e came out like 30 years ago!

I dunno about you. 30 years ago my needs and desires were different. The world around me was different. With a different world, and a different me, why would I expect to want the same sort of game experience?

Well, the campaign I was referring to was less than 20 years ago, from 2002-2007.

At any rate, you'll get whatever game experience you want from 5E. If you are happy with everything as it, wonderful for you. Although I find some of the mechanics and concepts interesting, well-thought out, and novel, there is a lot of it I don't like. I don't need all sorts of features, special abilities, etc. to make my character interesting for me to play. There are more and more options and things to choose from, which a lot of people love about it. I simply happen to be a player who doesn't.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Well, the campaign I was referring to was less than 20 years ago, from 2002-2007.

At any rate, you'll get whatever game experience you want from 5E. If you are happy with everything as it, wonderful for you. Although I find some of the mechanics and concepts interesting, well-thought out, and novel, there is a lot of it I don't like. I don't need all sorts of features, special abilities, etc. to make my character interesting for me to play. There are more and more options and things to choose from, which a lot of people love about it. I simply happen to be a player who doesn't.

Huh. You know, you don't often get the "5e just has too many options" complaint. It's usually heavily skewed in the other direction.

Curiously, if you dislike the system at the the basic level of character abilities, why are you bothering to correct things like the XP charts or darkvision? This really seems like rearranging the deck chairs instead of addressing your fundamental issues. If you think 5e is too fiddly on the character options, I heartily suggest a number of the newer (last decade or so) retro-clones that do a great job of fixing some of the mechanical issues of OD&D or 1E play while strongly evoking the feel of the game, including limited character options.

 

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

Huh. You know, you don't often get the "5e just has too many options" complaint. It's usually heavily skewed in the other direction.

Really? I just spent the afternoon reading through a few of the extra books (Xanthar's Guide, Mordenkainen's Foes, etc.) and I see more archetypes, more racial variations (how many races of Elf do you need!?! LOL), more ways to use skills, and so on. The player I was with can't decide what to do or where to take his PC because of all the options. They way it is going reminds me a lot of the Guide Books of 2E (Fighter's Guide, Complete Book of Dwarves, etc.) where again, so much was offered it became ridiculous IMO. Instead of thinking and using your imagination to make your character unique, it became an exercise in choosing special options. 3E did it again by adding Feats as well.

Don't misunderstand me, for many players having such things can certainly be helpful, but when as the DM I have to tell the players "No, I am not allowing it." or "Fine, let me read it since I don't have that source book as well." it becomes annoying. Back story and actual role-playing became the things that more defined your character, now it seems to be what special abilities does my character have that makes them unique?

Curiously, if you dislike the system at the the basic level of character abilities, why are you bothering to correct things like the XP charts or darkvision? This really seems like rearranging the deck chairs instead of addressing your fundamental issues. If you think 5e is too fiddly on the character options, I heartily suggest a number of the newer (last decade or so) retro-clones that do a great job of fixing some of the mechanical issues of OD&D or 1E play while strongly evoking the feel of the game, including limited character options.

Yeah, I've looked into a lot of things like that, the retro-clones, and they have some appeal. However much I long for nostalgia, I don't mind some options. Earlier editions have their pluses, but I think most of us can agree they had their fair share of minuses, too. So, despite my harping on 5E, there ARE things I like about it. I am only getting into because the new, younger group I am gaming with now were already curious about it. I mean, I get it: for a lot of younger players, the faster pace of advancement, rewards, etc. is more akin to video games. I've played my fair share of video games, but as I am getting older, I am losing interest in them.

---

Finally, for those of you who have been following this discussion all along (and not lost interest yet ) I am happy to announce after some discussion with one of my players this afternoon about the Character Advancement Table, I came to the conclusion the 21000 EXP jump from 10th to 11th was the part that most bothers me. The retracement from 21000 to 15000 and 20000 for the next two levels just seems fundamentally wrong. The simplest fix was to change the amount of EXP needed at 11th level, reducing it from 85000 to 80000. Now, it is 16000 from 10th to 11th (matching the prior needed amount) and increases the amount from 11th to 12th from 15000 to 20000, which matches the next two. All the other EXP amounts remained the same. True, I am not thrilled a couple times leveling requires the exact same amount needed as the prior level, but it is a much simpler fix than redoing the entire table.

 

[Umbran]

Well, the campaign I was referring to was less than 20 years ago, from 2002-2007.

Not really countering my point. Your campaign ended over a decade ago. You know, back before smartphones were really a thing.

Maybe your tastes haven't changed in a decade. But in general, we are talking about timespans long enough to fall in love, get married, have a kid, and get that kid into high school. Life changes, and broadly speaking, people's tastes and needs change around it. So, you shouldn't expect people to want the same kind of game they played decades back. It may happen, but you shouldn't *expect* it.

There are more and more options and things to choose from, which a lot of people love about it. I simply happen to be a player who doesn't.

I have to agree with Ovinomancer on this one. This edition has the *slowest* edition bloat since 1e! I dunno what edition you are playing, but the "more ad more"? Doesnt' describe the current editin very well.

 

[Azzy]

how many races of Elf do you need!?! LOL

I think 2e still holds the record there.

 

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

Not really countering my point. Your campaign ended over a decade ago. You know, back before smartphones were really a thing.

Maybe your tastes haven't changed in a decade. But in general, we are talking about timespans long enough to fall in love, get married, have a kid, and get that kid into high school. Life changes, and broadly speaking, people's tastes and needs change around it. So, you shouldn't expect people to want the same kind of game they played decades back. It may happen, but you shouldn't *expect* it.

Actually, your tastes might have changed, but most people's don't. They like the same foods, going to the same places they are familiar with, enjoy listening to the same songs for years, and so on. Sure, people try new things and some old things fade away or are replaced, but a lot of what we have loved for a long time stays with us. How many people cringe when a new OS comes out, for example? Change can be welcome, but it isn't always to everyone's liking.

I have to agree with Ovinomancer on this one. This edition has the *slowest* edition bloat since 1e! I dunno what edition you are playing, but the "more ad more"? Doesnt' describe the current editin very well.

That could easily be true. 2E went rampant with it, mostly with campaign settings, guide books, and several monsterous conpendium additions. Too many options turned me off of 3E, although I tried it for a couple years. I never played 4E or Pathfinder, so I can't attest to those. And 5E has been around for a while, so it might not seem like a lot to you, but for someone who is just starting it, there are already a lot of options. Considering it will probably go on for 4-6 more years before 6E, how much bloat will it have then?

2E was basically just a rewrite of 1E with slight changes and additions. I like the reworking for proficiencies in 2E (compared to the 1E offering in the Survival Guides), and the Initiative system was easier to follow. Dragons were made more powerful, which was also nice. From 1978 until 2007, I played my 1E (and later 1E/2E combo) very happily from Elementary School through Graduate School. Given how eager players seem to be to move from on to new things now, I seriously doubt many people will be playing 5E twenty years from now...

I think 2e still holds the record there.

You could easily be right, but at this point I am sure 5E is giving the record a run for its money.

At any rate, this thread has deviated from my original post to the point I am done with it. If any of you wish to continue it, enjoy.

 

[FrogReaver]

Actually, your tastes might have changed, but most people's don't. They like the same foods, going to the same places they are familiar with, enjoy listening to the same songs for years, and so on. Sure, people try new things and some old things fade away or are replaced, but a lot of what we have loved for a long time stays with us. How many people cringe when a new OS comes out, for example? Change can be welcome, but it isn't always to everyone's liking.

Most people change quite a bit throughout their lifetimes and major life events (that were already brought up) are one of the biggest factors. When faced with a choice that is independent of their lives at the time, you are right to note that people generally stay the same. That said, d&d is a timesink no matter how you slice it and time is one resource that everything else in our lives also require. So preferences that don't involve time, most of the things you menitioned, they are not likely to change. But anything that does is very much going to be influenced by the amount of available time we can make for it.