goodmangames wrote:More and more, I am seeing level 6-10 play as distinct from level 1-5 play. Remember the "level scale" here -- unlike 3E and 4E where the game is supposed to go to level 20 or 30, DCC RPG is a throwback to 1974 play where accomplishing 6th level was a huge deal. As such, I'm now inclined toward keeping the core book focused on level 1-5. The beta rules will focus on levels 1-5.
May I suggest a Middle Path?
Levels 1-10 sounds artificial, inorganic, machine-like, and arbitrary.
Levels 1-5 sounds like half of 1-10, and thus not a complete game.
How about levels 1-7? Consider:
1. By having levels top-out at something that is not a round number, it makes people think, "Hey, there are reasons why levels go up to level 7, no more and no less." Contrast that with levels 1-10 for DCC RPG, or levels 1-20 for 3rd edition, or levels 1-30 for 4th edition. Those level-cut-offs (10, 20, 30) are so arbitrary. Why not level 28? Or level 19? Or etc? The only reason for cut-offs at 10, 20, or 30 is that those numbers end with a 0. That's hardy reassuring.
2. The number 7 has a ton of mystical, occult, and historical significance behind it: the 7 hills of Rome, the 7 Wonders of the World, the seven visible planetoi (Moon, Mercury, Venus, Sun, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn), the 7-day week, the ubiquity of the number 7 in the Apocalypse, the 7 Deadly Sins, the 7 Virtues, the 7 Sacraments, the 7 Heavens, the 7 chakras, etc.
3. In the 1974 D&D rules, clerics gain the power of raising the dead at 7th level.
4. The 1974 D&D rules have 6 levels of spells. Bump that up to 7 levels of spells for the DCC RPG. That way you could simplify things: 4th-level spell-casters can cast spells of up to 4th-level, etc. (Contrast that with the much-less intuitive D&Dism of, for example, not being able to cast 7th-level spells until you're 13th level.)