Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MoogleEmpMog" data-source="post: 3428931" data-attributes="member: 22882">Honestly, I think a lot of the problems people have with high-level D&D owe their origins to the fact that, well, high-level D&D didn't originally exist. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />For all that's changed in the game, many things - among them a lot of spells, the toughness of characters, their impact on the world (and likewise the impact of suitable opponents on the world), their phenomenal wealth, and the prevalence of save or die effects at high levels - haven't changed a lot since OD&D, and even fewer have changed since AD&D (when 10th level was Name Level and considered close to the end of most characters' careers, at least as full time adventurers).Many people, including Gary Gygax's group, *played* all the way to high levels, but this wasn't what the game was originally designed for.  Compared to the very solid low- to mid-level rules, the high-level rules were somewhat spotty and inconsistent.  The rules have been clarified and expanded in later editions - but they still present a very different world, and a very different GAME, than low-level play would.I don't think D&D necessarily scales all that well, because it originally didn't have to.  That's where we get the 'every x levels, the gameplay changes' model we have today.  That's also why I advocate much, much more granularity in advancement, so that characters can improve mechanically on a regular basis without significantly changing what TYPE of game you're playing.</blockquote>

Verification