Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="GreyLord" data-source="post: 8311468" data-attributes="member: 4348">AD&amp;D HAD NO LEVEL LIMITS for humans and certain classes of demihumans.The tables may stop at lower levels in what they explicitly show, but they also explain how advancement beyond that can occur.&nbsp; 20th level was NOT the highest level you could go.AD&amp;D 2e had NO LEVEL LIMITS for humans and certain classes of demihumans.The tables may have stopped at lower levels in what they show on a table, but they also explain how advancement beyond that can occur.&nbsp; 20th level was NOT the highest level you could go.BX had NO LEVEL LIMITS for humans.IT had plans to show higher levels, but really only showed levelling up to around level 14&nbsp; It did have an explanation of how to go higher levels than that.BECMI DID have a level limit of 36 for humans...which is a LOT higher than level 10 OR level 20.D&amp;D 3e technically had NO LEVEL LIMITS.IT had it's core rules only really apply up to level 20 and epic rules which were different apply to higher levels, but in theory there was no upper limit.4e was the first to really introduce a universal level limit of 30 or less.5e has a level limit of 20 (though it has epic boons and feats that one could take after that).&nbsp; The question then isn't why D&amp;D still has level 16th to 20th, but why it is so restrictive that it feels that the game needs to specifically limit people in a bounded way like this???Obviously it must be popular to have the game limit groups like this by limiting the maximum available level...but why...beats me.Perhaps it's the desire for a small group of people to be able to &quot;win&quot; the game.&nbsp; You had a few of those in 3e and 4e...where you can win by maximizing your character at the &quot;maximum&quot; level of 20...thus...&quot;you win.&quot;&nbsp; Maybe...but I don't know why they purposefully limited the game to 20 levels and less which is different than any other version of prior D&amp;D.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="GreyLord, post: 8311468, member: 4348"] AD&D HAD NO LEVEL LIMITS for humans and certain classes of demihumans. The tables may stop at lower levels in what they explicitly show, but they also explain how advancement beyond that can occur. 20th level was NOT the highest level you could go. AD&D 2e had NO LEVEL LIMITS for humans and certain classes of demihumans. The tables may have stopped at lower levels in what they show on a table, but they also explain how advancement beyond that can occur. 20th level was NOT the highest level you could go. BX had NO LEVEL LIMITS for humans. IT had plans to show higher levels, but really only showed levelling up to around level 14 It did have an explanation of how to go higher levels than that. BECMI DID have a level limit of 36 for humans...which is a LOT higher than level 10 OR level 20. D&D 3e technically had NO LEVEL LIMITS. IT had it's core rules only really apply up to level 20 and epic rules which were different apply to higher levels, but in theory there was no upper limit. 4e was the first to really introduce a universal level limit of 30 or less. 5e has a level limit of 20 (though it has epic boons and feats that one could take after that). The question then isn't why D&D still has level 16th to 20th, but why it is so restrictive that it feels that the game needs to specifically limit people in a bounded way like this??? Obviously it must be popular to have the game limit groups like this by limiting the maximum available level...but why...beats me. Perhaps it's the desire for a small group of people to be able to "win" the game. You had a few of those in 3e and 4e...where you can win by maximizing your character at the "maximum" level of 20...thus..."you win." Maybe...but I don't know why they purposefully limited the game to 20 levels and less which is different than any other version of prior D&D. [/QUOTE]

Verification