Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 8621171" data-attributes="member: 29398">Where even back in the day I never knew anyone who kept xp for gp in the game.Where 2e's advancement pace pretty much matched what we were already used to.Parts of the game can still be gated behind levels, it just takes longer to get to and through those gates in a slower-advancing system.I find 1e is quite forgiving in this way as well, with a few obvious exceptions e.g. throwing monsters that can only be hit by magic at a party with no magic is not a good idea.  It was 3e where the window of viability for any given monster was so narrow.Indeed, in both directions.  If I used the levelling rate expected by 3e-4e-5e in my game they'd all be 83rd level by now, give or take 25.  That's not what I want, and I'm not alone in that.To me it's a part of the commercialization of game design - the publishers are going to sell more material if people are starting new campaigns every year or so than they are if people make their campaigns last ten years or more.  The cynic in me says that's what WotC wanted to find in their 1999 marketing survey - that campaigns were short - and so they excluded responses from the older crowd whose campaigns were likely much longer on average.  Then, they designed each edition since then to cater to that short-campaign market, and in so doing made short campaigns the expectation rather than the exception.</blockquote>