It's a matter of personal preference.
I have never liked the level caps in EVERY CRPG i played with one, and were probably a hundred. I also never liked the lv20 cap in D&D various versions and used specific optional rulesets to extend it at least to 30, demigodom etc.
In a computer transposition this is even more felt because the level-up is one of the few gratification that a computer DM will give you.

The library is a crazy map :D

Hey, have you asked them about the fonts, or discussed it on their Discord? I think someone mentioned that in the live Q&A stream they did recently, they said they still had to frame all the UI texts and all that. If there's enough demand for the font size, they may consider it.

It's unlikely you'll feel the cap, it should correspond pretty well to where you get after all the quests. You shouldn't worry too much, let them release this first game, they'll be more comfortable to add levels, quests, classes, … later, or in a DLC / next game :)

Well color me surprised as that was a fast Early Access game. As most developers take a whole year, while others get stuck in limbo for 7+ years. Hopefully it's not a short game.

May I just say this: I'm glad to see the absolute love this project is receiving here, to date. Looks like more than a few of us are looking forward to what promises to be a stellar game for all to enjoy!!

The current cap is 8 and I didn't manage to reach it, though I could have spent more time wandering for random encounters which might have got me there, so I'd think reaching 10 might similarly be a challenge with little chance of getting much beyond it XP wise!! :)

I'm afraid RPGs aren't supposed to be pure skinner boxes. I'm sorry that you require level-ups as your only enjoyment factor and can't find gratification from all the other aspects.

Maybe you could mod in this sound effect: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s75tuBlZ61w to randomly chime every half an hour?

You totally misunderstood me and wasted 0,2c with this reply.

I've read and re-read your posts. Your only issue seems to be regarding level, in that it is capped at 10. You prefer high level adventures and you said levelling is one of only a few things you feel is a positive about an RPG.

When the reality is, it is not at all unusual for a cRPG to be designed with a specific set of levels in mind, just as p&p modules often have a specific set of levels in mind.

Sure, if there's too much content for the level cap then the game will start to feel 'over' before reaching the end of the game as you would be repeating the same things too much. And, sure, if there's grinding of respawns involved then no doubt some people will just hamster wheel themselves happily to level infinity.

But a complete and well designed hand-crafted module designed for characters levelled 1-10, that's, like, ideal. Normal. Expected. Not an issue.

If I've misunderstood and your point is somehow actually specific to an issue with the game, please feel free to enlighten me, but at this point it just looks like "people on the internet will find literally anything to bitch about" level bizarity.

As I see it, forums are there to share opinions. We could also share opinions on opinions but that may quickly get out of hand ;)

Telstar said it would be day 1 buy for him but he'd rather have more than level 10, then many commented on the level subject, and he explained a bit further why he preferred more. Personally I see no problem with that, fair discussion :)

Don't make it worse then…

I like the fact they don't want/try to do the whole level 1 to 20.

In level 1 to 20 games, you tend to level up too quickly. It feels a bit ridiculous and surreal.

More importantly, it's way easier to make interesting, coherent and challenging "worlds" without having to resort to cheap and artificial tricks such as having the level of the enemies grow according to the level of your characters. I think it's one of the reasons for why BG2 second chapter was so beloved.

Nod, I completely agree, Vanedor. It's hard to pack those entire twenty levels into one game, especially these days where some of the focus needs be on graphic quality, because of reasons. A little good nibble, solid and nourishing is better than a platter full of scraps. If the first game does well, the next iteration can give us the next step!

Plus you can always add more levels later as DLC, or extra content that feels meaningful, so it's a good idea to end the campaign in a point where continuing later with your beloved party makes sense. So many games that add a DLC when you are already a god and it's just steamrolling over content for the story alone, which is not always that entertaining.

The problem I see with using table top levels in a game is that a part of the fun on polaying games on PC is the leveling, you generally don't do as much in 2 hours of a table top game playing an adventure with friends.

I guess what I am saying is due to the amount you do in less time on a pc game that leveling is part of the fun I guess.

It would be interesting to compare the rate in the different games, and how extra levels translate in more abilities, spells and so on. But it's probably not easy.

Solasta offers 10 levels for roughly 40 hours of play, a party of 4 that is entirely controlled and leveled up by the player, and TBM combat.

The closest game for that comparison is Baldur's Gate 3, which should be roughly 100 hours, also for 10 levels (TBC, it may still change but not much). Also for a party of 4 entirely controlled by the player and TBM. That's at least a 1:2 ratio (because of the big map with traveling back & forth, lots of spoken dialogs).

Pathfinder: Kingmaker in TBM is about 200-250 hours, but to level 20, and party of 6 with more enemies. In RTwP it's half that duration, but either way that must feel quite longer (and I can vouch for that). Level progression is logarithmic though.

Neverwinter Nights' original campaign would get the player to about level 15 in roughly 60 hours average, RTwP, the player controls his/her own character only, so that must feel a bit longer comparatively, especially when the combat are quicker to end in that mode. But again, progression isn't linear.

In conclusion, Solasta shouldn't feel boring, it's pretty much on the low duration/level in comparison to other games. BG3 should feel much slower, and as limited with the levels. There are other advantages to make up for it, of course, the rate of XP isn't everything.

Not just here but a lot of D&D websites also. I visit many of them and people seem just as excited for Solasta as they are for BG3. One of the main reasons seems to be the implementation of 5e rules. I think this is how you do an EA release. Really got a lot of people talking about this game.

I haven't bought this yet….perhaps I should.

I'm really not a fan of the fifth edition rules, far from it actually, as I much prefer the second or third rule-set, yet I'm still hopeful that this will turn out well. If nothing else I applaud the effort and tenacity that's gone into this creation!

For anyone interested, message from Tactical Adventures on Discord:
EDIT: Feedback will be on Discord, or maybe Google forms if there is too much chat for them to handle.

Probably most won't participate, to avoid ruining the experience of the final game (which seems a wise strategy). At least it gives an indication of the progress :)