Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AmerginLiath" data-source="post: 6450280" data-attributes="member: 777">I like the idea of taking advantage of the tiers built into the system (even perhaps subdividing the 4-11 tier into 4-7 and 8-11 for such purposes). To be fair, I think that bounded accuracy and the XP/CR system of 5e helps, but it also depends on the nature of the particular campaign and setting.As I've mentioned before, I'm used to gaming in a setting (Dragonlance) where there aren't supposed to be many high-level characters and more of a mix of combat, exploration, and social sessions fit into the &quot;epic fantasy&quot; setting. As such, characters who get into the 12-16 tier are semi-retired anyway and brought out again only for special occasions, while a player might have a range of characters in what's now the 1-3, 4-7, and 8-11 tiers (5e really seems to be built for the precise game we played in 2e and kept adjusting 3.x to try to keep going!).As more campaigns transition back more away from the &quot;encounter model,&quot; (I think many of us can remember how we hilariously played 3.0 like it was still AD&amp;D and rarely fought anything for months until we grokked the new paradigm) a range of a few levels within a party will be less of a difference since the Encounter and Social aspects of the game will be more specifically supported at all levels of play. But every edition has that learning curve of retraining ourselves for using the ruleset in the most conducive way for adventuring and campaigning, and that heavily impacts how to deal with introducing new characters. But, I don't see a huge issue of having a slight range (especially as there's the matter of learning complexity for certain classes, where starting a few levels back and then gaining up XP might be better than trying to figure all the new abilities all at once)...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AmerginLiath, post: 6450280, member: 777"] I like the idea of taking advantage of the tiers built into the system (even perhaps subdividing the 4-11 tier into 4-7 and 8-11 for such purposes). To be fair, I think that bounded accuracy and the XP/CR system of 5e helps, but it also depends on the nature of the particular campaign and setting. As I've mentioned before, I'm used to gaming in a setting (Dragonlance) where there aren't supposed to be many high-level characters and more of a mix of combat, exploration, and social sessions fit into the "epic fantasy" setting. As such, characters who get into the 12-16 tier are semi-retired anyway and brought out again only for special occasions, while a player might have a range of characters in what's now the 1-3, 4-7, and 8-11 tiers (5e [i]really[/i] seems to be built for the precise game we played in 2e and kept adjusting 3.x to try to keep going!). As more campaigns transition back more away from the "encounter model," (I think many of us can remember how we hilariously played 3.0 like it was still AD&D and rarely fought anything for months until we grokked the new paradigm) a range of a few levels within a party will be less of a difference since the Encounter and Social aspects of the game will be more specifically supported at all levels of play. But every edition has that learning curve of retraining ourselves for using the ruleset in the most conducive way for adventuring and campaigning, and that heavily impacts how to deal with introducing new characters. But, I don't see a huge issue of having a slight range (especially as there's the matter of learning complexity for certain classes, where starting a few levels back and then gaining up XP might be better than trying to figure all the new abilities all at once)... [/QUOTE]

Verification