|
9 months ago ::
Sep 22, 2012 - 8:00PM
#21
|
Date Joined:
May 18, 2002
|
Did Chainmail use levels?
Men & Magic definitely did.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 22, 2012 - 8:06PM
#22
|
- VCL Emeritus
- The Inquisitor
|
The OP is misremembering an anecdote involding Dave Arneson. Specifically, before development on the original Dungeons & Dragons game began in earnest, Arneson used Rock/Paper/Scissors for campaigns played in Blackmoor as his gaming interests began to move away from wargaming and into the exploits of individual heroes. Regardless, this method was abandoned as the rules for D&D developed between Arneson and Gygax.
Quentin Small
WotC Online Community Coordinator
All around helpful simian
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 22, 2012 - 8:16PM
#23
|
|
|
Mr. Gygax resolved combat in his original dungeon with "Rocks, Paper, Sissors". "Levels" only applied to the depth of the dungeons, not the characters. It's a natural progression, deeper dungeons require stronger characters ad infinitum. Even D&D succumbs at some point to the law of diminishing returns. Here we are in the 21st century, with 4e "Epic" levels and so forth. We are way, way beyond even Gygax's imagination, and what are we doing? Adding complexity. That alone alienates any fanbase
please go reread the original Chainmail rules and compare the complexity with modern games.
Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say? Spoiler:
Show
My Webcomic
Updated Tuesday and Thursday
Read my blog on the WotC Community Site (updated irregularly to avoid spamming the "Featured Blogger" list).
You can follow me on Twitter: "@DnDJester"
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 22, 2012 - 8:58PM
#24
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
I am DMng a 5E playtest game that had three different story lines going at the same time. I am not an accountant. I am just organized and flexible. 5E will keep me, as a DM, hopping. But I can't imagine enjoying DMing a game that did not. Plus, my feedback is amazing. They still need me.  I am about done with the playtest material, tho. There is nothing in the beastiary that can touch my capped sorcerer.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 22, 2012 - 10:12PM
#25
|
Date Joined:
Jun 22, 2010
|
Answer: Have a slow experience progression with any version of D&D you want to play. That way you can experience as much of each level as you want. The rest just gets into a mechanics discussion, and I agree everyone has different tastes. The only other thing I can state, is the benefit of sticking with the current edition of the game is support in regards to adventures, etc. That has always been my biggest draw to the system, including the availability of players. There are other systems that work better for my needs, but I do not have the time available to create adventures, worlds, etc. like I did when I first started to play.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 23, 2012 - 12:59AM
#26
|
Date Joined:
Jan 29, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 23, 2012 - 2:18AM
#27
|
Date Joined:
Jul 23, 2010
|
I don't really see a problem here. You don't like higher level play and the additional complexity that comes with it? Don't make characters level up in your campaign. If you and your players do not feel the need to acquire new, shiny options for your characters during a campaign and are content doing the same things over and over, do it.
The Wotc police is not going to bash down the door and burn your books.
However, those of us (the overwhelming majority, I'd say) who like levels and a bit of scaling complexity, need professionally designed rules. You see, it's much easier to have something (like rules for leveling up characters and multiple class/feats/spells options) and ignore it if you don't like it, than to NOT have something and having to create it from scratch if you want it.
Let us have our multiple, complex options. You can safely ignore them.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 23, 2012 - 3:49AM
#28
|
|
|
If WOTC want to make an impact with Next, eliminate levels altoghether. Good dungeon masters, like professional screen-writers can adapt and make endlessly incredible adventures using simple level one characters. That's where everybody starts, and that's what everybody loves.
I disagree!
The DM isn't the only person playing at the table. Everybody is! Creating your character, imagining his background or how he looks is all part of the fun. Having your character go from zero to hero is loads of fun. All these things make a better story.
I've played other games that don't use levels (GURPS, d100 games). They're not nearly as fun than D&D. Whenever I play these games, I always get the feeling that my character is stagnating. The only exception is Cthulhu because in our games, combat pretty much means we're going to die.
Even for a DM, levels are fun. You have a lot more to take into account against high level characters: divinations, bad ass exploration spells. Incorporating these new spells in the story just makes it better.
Chess players never tire of the format. It is the same for any successfull game. Get a clue.
Developpement is an integral part of many other games. Why do people play FarmVille, Railroad Tycoon, Sim City, the Sims? What's the point in having a Tamagotchi?
All these games have one thing in common: you're building something. Character building is fun! Well for some of us anyways.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 23, 2012 - 4:48AM
#29
|
Date Joined:
Sep 19, 2006
|
4. Preachings from WOTC talk about the sanctity of the "core rules". Substitute "core rules" for "Level 1 basic rules". Any difference? Layering complexity on top of the core rules only circumvents those rules.
I get how you feel. Sometimes the numbers "mill" seems to increase just because the monsters numbers increase. And the monsters only increase because they need to be a challenge for Player's increase, and on and on. So at 1st level you have an AC of 18 and that's pretty awesome, but by level 8 an AC of 18 is pretty bad and you need to be in the low to mid 20's to be effective. The thing is, D&D has always done this for the past 25+ years. Expecting it to change NOW is just wishful hoping. And apparently this model has been effective as a D&D game for 25+ years (or longer).
So, my suggestion is: Don't level up your characters as you adventure. Perhaps you still want to add some magical items to your game, then use the D&D:Next rules for magical items as they pertain to your campaign or perhaps you like the 1st level Dual-Class/Hybrid rules (if they make such a thing). What E6 did (a version of 3rd Edition D&D) is stop progression at 6th level and from there, progress by Feats as you gain XP. So if your players still want some sort of gain/growth from adventuring then perhaps instead of level, you just gain Feats.
Anyways, I don't think this is the death of D&D at all. The model has been unchanging for as long as I've played the game and while the differences of HOW to play the game change all the time, the basic principals that D&D has run on are still there: A class-based, level-based
Fantasy Roleplaying Game.
5. Being bored easily is the same thing as "Short Attention Span Theater". It"s not an indication of intelligence, rather the opposite.
Now for this; first a short attention span does not equate to limited intelligence. That's just plain insulting. Second, the game can get stale for players when their options are never changing. Using the same maneuvers, the same 10 spells, the same armor or weapons, going against the same monsters IS boring (IMO) after a few months of playing it. If there feels like there is no progression (aside from story) then after a while the POINT in adventuring loses it's luster. So, if your group is fine with 1st level and the basic rules of D&D:Next, then I'd suggest you house-rule a "No Progression" rule where your 1st level character is the end-all, be-all and live with it. I would not expect D&D:Next, however, to conform to that and remain with levels for the end of days.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 23, 2012 - 6:33AM
#30
|
Date Joined:
May 29, 2012
|
If WOTC want to make an impact with Next, eliminate levels altoghether. Good dungeon masters, like professional screen-writers can adapt and make endlessly incredible adventures using simple level one characters. That's where everybody starts, and that's what everybody loves.
I disagree!
The DM isn't the only person playing at the table. Everybody is! Creating your character, imagining his background or how he looks is all part of the fun. Having your character go from zero to hero is loads of fun. All these things make a better story.
I've played other games that don't use levels (GURPS, d100 games). They're not nearly as fun than D&D. Whenever I play these games, I always get the feeling that my character is stagnating. The only exception is Cthulhu because in our games, combat pretty much means we're going to die.
Even for a DM, levels are fun. You have a lot more to take into account against high level characters: divinations, bad ass exploration spells. Incorporating these new spells in the story just makes it better.
Chess players never tire of the format. It is the same for any successfull game. Get a clue.
Developpement is an integral part of many other games. Why do people play FarmVille, Railroad Tycoon, Sim City, the Sims? What's the point in having a Tamagotchi?
All these games have one thing in common: you're building something. Character building is fun! Well for some of us anyways.
If level 5 is more fun than level 1, why bother with level 1 at all? I don't believe that level 1 is level 5 with training wheels attached. Adding modifiers and more hit points is not in any way "character building". I'm just saying that moving your character up another level shouldn't be the be all and end all of the game. Level 10 characters are not "more fun". They are more complicated. You have to carry around lots of paperwork to keep track of all the additions. If that is the goal, why not just start with those rules and powers anyway?
|
|
|
