Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6675786" data-attributes="member: 82106">Well, I don't know if this actually happens or not, who can really say? Given that each level is effectively 2-3 D&D levels of worth of advancement, there's no actual difference in total advancement, and thus if you for instance preferred 'E6' (IE low level play in 3.x) or Heroic tier 4e, then you'd be jammed into 2-3 total levels worth of advancement in 13a, which I didn't find to be a terribly inviting prospect EITHER, though honestly I hadn't thought about it until now. My theory is that people who play mostly low level do so because they WANT to do that, not because they can't advance their characters quickly to higher levels if that was what they really wanted to play. If I'm correct, then compressing the game to 10 levels isn't doing them any favors. Likewise if someone really wants to play high level, then wouldn't they simply give out lots of XP or start at Paragon, or whatever? I'd think so! I don't know that you're wrong, but it seems to me that removing granularity just limits people's options, it doesn't give them MORE options. I sort of felt like there was some fuzzy thinking around this in 13a's design. 5e's designers seem to have erred in some similar respects at times too.</blockquote>