D&D 5E What's the rush? Has the "here and now" been replaced by the "next level" attitude?

[Campbell]

I'd argue if there has been a meaningful shift it's not necessarily one of delayed versus instant gratification. My most recent experiences with AD&D (which were less than a year ago in an admittedly dungeon crawl oriented game) taught me that leveling past 6th level or so was not really all that exciting. New magic items were far more interesting and had a larger impact on character power (I include spell scrolls here). I had to almost force myself to continue to care about leveling up - my dwarven fighter had some pretty good saves, more than enough hp, hit things pretty well, etc. I almost had to force myself to keep tracking my xp. I think the trend over time has been to de-emphasize gear and focus more on character potency. It's more reliable sure, but depending on treasure table RNG is not really less immediate in my experience.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

It is absolutely true that 3e and 4e encourage (but does not require) a greater emphasis on long-term, level-by-level character construction.

The conclusion that "therefore players today don't care about anything but leveling up" is ridiculous.

When you exaggerate what was said it does come out a bit ridiculous.

 

[The Human Target]

That's the entire premise of the thread!

 

[Kinak]

Just curious, [MENTION=91812]ForeverSlayer[/MENTION] do you use XP or level up at the plot-appropriate points?

I'm curious because it seems to me that the latter would keep even the most level-driven characters focused on the plot. I know it helped me tamp down people's kill-stuff-get-XP-gain-levels urges back in 2nd Edition, but it's possible you're seeing something different.

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[Hussar]

No, I'm pretty confident the attitude has changed and no lack of being observant played a part.

Really? In the 1e DMG it's noted that it takes about 50 sessions to hit name level. Around 4-6 sessions per level.

How fast do your 3e or Pathfinder games level? Because that's identical to mine.

 

[Hussar]

More easy and faster leveling, "special abilities, etc." at every level, wealth by level guidelines/treasure parcels, etc. All this entices the player more and more to "get to the next level", so much that playing what you have became boring as you do not get your next reward.

Thing is, none of this is new. The game always had this. The only difference is that 3e explicitly called it out. 4e as well. But all of this was certainly implicit in earlier editions.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

Just curious, [MENTION=91812]ForeverSlayer[/MENTION] do you use XP or level up at the plot-appropriate points?

I'm curious because it seems to me that the latter would keep even the most level-driven characters focused on the plot. I know it helped me tamp down people's kill-stuff-get-XP-gain-levels urges back in 2nd Edition, but it's possible you're seeing something different.

Cheers!
Kinak

I used to only give XP after a few sessions and not as soon as a battle was over.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

Really? In the 1e DMG it's noted that it takes about 50 sessions to hit name level. Around 4-6 sessions per level.

How fast do your 3e or Pathfinder games level? Because that's identical to mine.

What page in the 1st edition DMG?

 

[Hussar]

What page in the 1st edition DMG?

Dunno. Your going to have to find that one yourself.

 

[Hussar]

My bad. Not the DMG but

Originally Posted by Gary Gygax, the Strategic Review Issue 2.2, page 23
It is reasonable to calculate that if a fair player takes part in 50 to 75 games in the course of a year he should acquire sufficient experience points to make him about 9th to 11th level, assuming that he manages to survive all that play.


Read more: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?267247-Leveling-assumptions-then-and-now#ixzz2xFPzGld6