Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Willie the Duck" data-source="post: 9017360" data-attributes="member: 6799660">Okay, so a worldbuilding-mechanics matchup or 'treat like thing the same.' Certainly one option. I recognize the logic of the preference. I think the counter-point is that the game is PC/player-facing*, and the mechanics of things should be designed around how they most frequently will intersect with the played game. Which one prefers probably depends on how much one finds one convenient or the other better at anchoring, etc. *a common example being the equipment costs/hireling wages designed for PCs making tough decisions around dungeon-crawling equipment and hireling costs, not to model a functional economy.I honestly don't know where that came from. I feel like it existed somewhat throughout most of the AD&D (where the charts listed the levels out to 20) and BECMI (where there was an actual cap at 36). At the same time, I think it was treated as a much more theoretical cap, as 1) advancement was very slow, 2) actually surviving enough adventures to get to very high levels was a challenge*, everything after name level (or definitely after MUs/mages got 9th-level spells) was very similar (and nothing special about the capstone levels). *of course, given the variety of how people actually played, exactly how challenging is perpetually up for debate.If I had a guess, I think 3e just inspired the notion by making 1-20 a continuum (no name-level inflection point where everything (supposedly) changes, with hitting the capstone having a special quality (even if it is simply 'past this point, you use the Epic rules').That said, I don't remember that actually being that much of a thing in-real-play. Online, particularly in the Optimization boards on Wizards.com and GitP and such, I certainly think there was a mindset of mapping out a character 1-20. But at tables? I think it was the same old 'we play until keeping all the plates spinning becomes more work than fun, then we quit and start over (or do something else)' same as it always was.</blockquote>

Verification