Adventures: What level range would you like?

[Ilwan]

A question for both DM´s and players alike. Please reply with "DM" or "Player" below.

[Ram Tyr]

I voted for levels 1-2.

There are two reasons I voted 1-2:
1. because I like starting at first level with a new character, and
2. I really want adventures to be strung together.

By strung together, I like the A1, A2, A3 style of modules/adventures. Where you can pick up from one and move into another. If adventures start with new characters, there is a greater chance that follow up modules will build on that story.

Later.
Ramza

[gurney9999]

As a player and DM I agree with Ramza0Tyr (man you got a hard name to type), but I voted for 3-5 for two reasons:

it's sometimes hard to develop good first level modules because you can get hamstrung by what the characters can face...

i'm already working on entry level modules, so if 3-5th level modules are made available that I can fit into my campaign I'd like to see them. :)

[Schiz]

My vote also goes to 1-2.

1. as i'm a beginning user with FG, i can begin slow with the features, and it's easier to learn the program that way (at lvl 10, you have to keep track at alot of info)
2. i believe there is alot more basic roleplay at lower lvl's.
3. i think an campaign has to start at the beginning ;)

[kepli]

Player + DM

I like to start in the beginning to help develop a character to it's fullest.

[Asuril]

I partially agree with Kepli, I like developing my character the maximum amount.

However, in a 1-off game (just a quick adventure), level 1 or 2 can be a bit restrictive in what the DM can entertain the players with. So I voted 3-5.

However, if it were available, I'd vote 1-20. :) I love long running campaigns that span years of IG time, and show the realization of becoming a true hero.

[Player and DM]

[Alkaven]

It's strange... Lots of people voted 1-2... but even though my adventure is in that level range, I still don't have enough players.

[Snikle]

I voted for 3-5, I reall ylove taking players from 1-2, but the real fun starts usually around 3 or 4 for me, thats when the story gets going good, the players have all developed strong personalities for their characters, and everyone is 'in the groove'. All in all, makes for a great time.

[Brytestar]

Player because I only got the lite version. I went with 6-8 because I like to see more 'established' PCs with stronger staying power. But still have some room for development.

[Sigurd]

I'd really like to see cohesion between adventures. Low level adventures should build into upper level adventures.

Setting pieces without necessary adventures would also be nice. A beautiful graphic and an interesting town\settlement\site would be useful for my other games.

Sigurd

[Necron99]

Odd. I voted for high-level stuff, because the low-levels are the easiest to plan (or adapt) an adventure for. Higher levels are much more difficult to put into FG, so I voted for having those done for me.

Heck, I can do my own low-lev adventure entry in a few hours, I don't need to pay for it.

[Alkaven]

I voted for 3-5, I reall ylove taking players from 1-2, but the real fun starts usually around 3 or 4 for me, thats when the story gets going good, the players have all developed strong personalities for their characters, and everyone is 'in the groove'. All in all, makes for a great time.

I agree. But that's because at level 3-5, the players have a history. They are a little more 'known'. They've probably defended a town from an orcish raid, or have bravely succeeded on perilous expeditions.

Some things you miss out though on those skipped levels. The arch nemesis whose plan you managed to foil, or the reoccurance of NPC comrades you've met before. Crucial parts about your past that makes levels 3-5 even more exciting.

The pattern in all my adventures is usually that the player advances midway into level 2 after the first adventure, then slightly into 3 after the second. At which point, you have amazing stories to tell when you walk into tavern for the third adventure.

After you hit level 6, Tavern jobs are a waste of time. People will come to you, not the other way around. And odds are good, you may have even met the king once. Level 8, enemies simply fear you, thinking you cannot be killed, and you'd spend your time better ridding the world of monsters that no one else can best against.

Then post 10... You should be a legend. But your also weary and worn from the bloodshed you've seen, and the tests of insanity you've resisted. And if your still alive by 13, people don't even believe you exist, and half the stories they tell about you are myths.

Level 15, your body and mind should be altered beyond reason. And odds are good, you don't even exist in the same plane of existance.

And level 20 is a joke...

[NeoDante]

For me as a DM-the higher level content is the hardest to do well-
The 'epic' feel which should accompany these higher levels is very hard to acheive and can't be done just by throwing 'bigger' monsters at the party-It should be more about the character development and the long ranging effects characters of this power have on the campaign world around them-these are hard things to do well.

[Ilwan]

Thanks for your participation so far. This has been very informative

[Sigurd]

I think that if you invert the number progression 1-10 and multiply by 3 you get a good number of adventures. lvl 1 should have 30. Level 2: 27 and so on up to level 10 which should have 3. The higher level adventures are bound to be larger and more complicated. I think its quite possible that 3 10th level adventures are similar in size to all 30 first level ones.

That seems like my .02

Sigurd