Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 8621057" data-attributes="member: 22779">There's the kicker though.&nbsp; That whole &quot;dropped the xp for gp rule&quot;.&nbsp; I'll admit, I never saw that when I played.&nbsp; So our experience largely matched what Gygax mentions in the 1e DMG - name level after a year or so of regular play.&nbsp; That's the pace I cut my teeth on anyway.&nbsp; When 2e came along with it's much slower advancement, I simply found that I picked certain monsters from time to time for the sole purpose of bumping the PC's up in XP.&nbsp; Demons and devils were fantastic for this.&nbsp; 2e demons were giant bags of XP, where even tiny ones that were minor threats were still worth thousands of Xp each.&nbsp; So, to me, the whole level pacing thing has never really changed in any edition of the game.&nbsp; About 1 year of regular play (weekly, 3-5 hours) gets the party to about 10th level.&nbsp; Give or take.&nbsp; Sadly, since my campaigns rarely last two years, we almost never see the highest of levels - generally campaigns for me end about 13-15th level.&nbsp; And, [USER=30518]@lewpuls[/USER] points to MMO's here.&nbsp; But, there's a rather lengthy list of CRPG's that pre-date MMO's by quite a lot.&nbsp; Final Fantasy came out in 1987 and was 100% geared around leveling up.&nbsp; Content in the game was gated behind levels.&nbsp; Ultima was released in 1986 and, again, was about as D&amp;D as it could get at the time and gated the game behind levels.&nbsp; Heck, even D&amp;D as written gated exploration behind levels.&nbsp; If you made the mistake of going too deep into a dungeon, you were going to die because you weren't high enough level.So, I'd argue that leveling was a primary focus of D&amp;D right from the get go.&nbsp; At 1st level you couldn't explore certain areas without dying.&nbsp; You were expected to stick to this or that area until you leveled up enough to go to that other area.&nbsp; Even the modules were gated behind levels.&nbsp; You wouldn't play the G series of adventures with 1st level characters.&nbsp; If you wanted to use certain adventures, your group had to be the appropriate level.Focus on leveling up isn't solely the issue of players.&nbsp; Leveling affects the entire campaign.&nbsp; I can't use certain monsters (well, I could, but, they'd be instant death sentences) until the party gets to a certain level.&nbsp; If I want to do a &quot;hunt the big dragon&quot; scenario, I have to wait for a while as a DM.&nbsp; This is one thing that 4e did rather well.&nbsp; Because the math in 4e was so clear, you could generally use encounters +/-5 levels of the group and it would work quite well.&nbsp; It meant that you weren't quite so restricted by levels in the adventures you could create.See, this is one aspect of 5e that people don't think about.&nbsp; Because 5e characters are so much more durable than in previous editions, you can get away with a much broader range of adventures than you could before.&nbsp; 3e, for example, was very level restricted because the monsters gained so much power between CR levels.&nbsp; A CR 6 creature was a LOT more powerful than a CR 4 creature.&nbsp; Which meant you had to be very careful not to stray to far above the party's level when designing adventures.&nbsp; AD&amp;D was a bit more forgiving, mostly because combat was so much less lethal than in 3e.&nbsp; AD&amp;D's lethality generally came from save or die effects, which weren't particularly level dependent.&nbsp; 5e goes the other way.&nbsp; It's not easy to kill 5e characters - which means I don't have to wait for double digit levels to throw a bunch of giants at the party, like I would in 3e or use giants that are easily killed like in AD&amp;D (42 HP giants anyone?).&nbsp; In any case, leveling has more impact on the game than simply what toys the players get at what level.&nbsp; From the DM's perspective, levels have a HUGE impact on everything a DM does.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 8621057, member: 22779"] There's the kicker though. That whole "dropped the xp for gp rule". I'll admit, I never saw that when I played. So our experience largely matched what Gygax mentions in the 1e DMG - name level after a year or so of regular play. That's the pace I cut my teeth on anyway. When 2e came along with it's much slower advancement, I simply found that I picked certain monsters from time to time for the sole purpose of bumping the PC's up in XP. Demons and devils were fantastic for this. 2e demons were giant bags of XP, where even tiny ones that were minor threats were still worth thousands of Xp each. So, to me, the whole level pacing thing has never really changed in any edition of the game. About 1 year of regular play (weekly, 3-5 hours) gets the party to about 10th level. Give or take. Sadly, since my campaigns rarely last two years, we almost never see the highest of levels - generally campaigns for me end about 13-15th level. And, [USER=30518]@lewpuls[/USER] points to MMO's here. But, there's a rather lengthy list of CRPG's that pre-date MMO's by quite a lot. Final Fantasy came out in 1987 and was 100% geared around leveling up. Content in the game was gated behind levels. Ultima was released in 1986 and, again, was about as D&D as it could get at the time and gated the game behind levels. Heck, even D&D as written gated exploration behind levels. If you made the mistake of going too deep into a dungeon, you were going to die because you weren't high enough level. So, I'd argue that leveling was a primary focus of D&D right from the get go. At 1st level you couldn't explore certain areas without dying. You were expected to stick to this or that area until you leveled up enough to go to that other area. Even the modules were gated behind levels. You wouldn't play the G series of adventures with 1st level characters. If you wanted to use certain adventures, your group had to be the appropriate level. Focus on leveling up isn't solely the issue of players. Leveling affects the entire campaign. I can't use certain monsters (well, I could, but, they'd be instant death sentences) until the party gets to a certain level. If I want to do a "hunt the big dragon" scenario, I have to wait for a while as a DM. This is one thing that 4e did rather well. Because the math in 4e was so clear, you could generally use encounters +/-5 levels of the group and it would work quite well. It meant that you weren't quite so restricted by levels in the adventures you could create. See, this is one aspect of 5e that people don't think about. Because 5e characters are so much more durable than in previous editions, you can get away with a much broader range of adventures than you could before. 3e, for example, was very level restricted because the monsters gained so much power between CR levels. A CR 6 creature was a LOT more powerful than a CR 4 creature. Which meant you had to be very careful not to stray to far above the party's level when designing adventures. AD&D was a bit more forgiving, mostly because combat was so much less lethal than in 3e. AD&D's lethality generally came from save or die effects, which weren't particularly level dependent. 5e goes the other way. It's not easy to kill 5e characters - which means I don't have to wait for double digit levels to throw a bunch of giants at the party, like I would in 3e or use giants that are easily killed like in AD&D (42 HP giants anyone?). In any case, leveling has more impact on the game than simply what toys the players get at what level. From the DM's perspective, levels have a HUGE impact on everything a DM does. [/QUOTE]

Verification