Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mercule" data-source="post: 7500100" data-attributes="member: 5100">Now, all of this I can get behind. There is definitely an expectation of improvement and 5E has it to a higher degree than 1E (but lower than 3E). It was the &quot;zero to hero&quot;, specifically, that I disagreed with.In the earliest incarnations of the game, a 1st level character was just good enough to warrant a separate figure, rather than a stand, on a battlefield. They weren't &quot;zero&quot;, but they weren't unrealistic, either (at least not fighters/men-at-arms). In 1E, even at &quot;name level&quot;, a PC fighter didn't really get above 1980s action movie hero level. After that, they were mostly retired. I'm not sure whether Gygax actually intended PCs to make much use of the higher level spells or if they were added mainly as an way to excuse/explain the abilities of certain NPCs.So, &quot;capable to heroic&quot; might be more accurate, but it doesn't have the same ring to it. So, &quot;zero to hero&quot;, but only for certain definitions where &quot;zero&quot; means capable and &quot;hero&quot; doesn't exceed a reasonable threshold for suspension of disbelief. It's capable of handling &quot;rube farmboy to slayer of gods&quot;, but it tends to break down, especially at the upper end of that. As you say, there are better systems.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mercule, post: 7500100, member: 5100"] Now, all of this I can get behind. There is definitely an expectation of improvement and 5E has it to a higher degree than 1E (but lower than 3E). It was the "zero to hero", specifically, that I disagreed with. In the earliest incarnations of the game, a 1st level character was just good enough to warrant a separate figure, rather than a stand, on a battlefield. They weren't "zero", but they weren't unrealistic, either (at least not fighters/men-at-arms). In 1E, even at "name level", a PC fighter didn't really get above 1980s action movie hero level. After that, they were mostly retired. I'm not sure whether Gygax actually intended PCs to make much use of the higher level spells or if they were added mainly as an way to excuse/explain the abilities of certain NPCs. So, "capable to heroic" might be more accurate, but it doesn't have the same ring to it. So, "zero to hero", but only for certain definitions where "zero" means capable and "hero" doesn't exceed a reasonable threshold for suspension of disbelief. It's [U]capable[/U] of handling "rube farmboy to slayer of gods", but it tends to break down, especially at the upper end of that. As you say, there are better systems. [/QUOTE]

Verification