Remove Minimum Level From Quests!

[Alexanderjac]

Let's say I'm level 19, and want to check out Stranglethorn Vale. I could, but when I arrived, there'd be no quests for me there despite only a 6 level deficit. What's wrong with trying to level in a zone a few levels higher than your current level? If I can take on the enemies there, there shouldn't be any reason why I can't take the quests there. I think it would make leveling more fun for people who want more of a challenge.

[Worgslarg]

It's because a level one could get flown to cata zones, pick up quests that give several thousand xp each, and get carried.

Which would remove the market for RaF or character boosts, in addition to making leveling much faster than blizzard intends.

[Ratyrel]

While it sounds like a great idea to infuse a bit of a challenge and reward dynamic into levelling, people would just abuse it no end.

[Donald Hellscream]

I can't imagine it being that fun to see attack upon attack miss on enemies much higher level than yourself but I suppose if want the challenge of barely being able to hit stuff its somewhat reasonable.

[Alexanderjac]

Well Blizzard could just add in a feature that if a character was 10 or more levels higher than you, their contributions would not contribute to the quest completion. There must be some way to prevent this kind of exploitation.

[Worgslarg]

Well Blizzard could just add in a feature that if a character was 10 or more levels higher than you, their contributions would not contribute to the quest completion. There must be some way to prevent this kind of exploitation.

There is. It's minimum level.

[Deleted]

Maybe quests 6-10 levels ahead of you could scale down.

[yjmark]

Removing the min is not really needed.

Lowering the min by 10 levels would be totally awesome. The benefits are huge for leveling variation (could finally level in Netherstorm without getting totally gimped - stuff like that). There are no real downsides.

[The One Percent]

They should just lower the min, not remove it completely.

[Eace]

Removing the min is not really needed.

Lowering the min by 10 levels would be totally awesome. The benefits are huge for leveling variation (could finally level in Netherstorm without getting totally gimped - stuff like that). There are no real downsides.

I agree, they should reintroduce red quests.

[Ossandran]

You're level 19, go quest for an hour and you'll be in STV

[Alexanderjac]

You're level 19, go quest for an hour and you'll be in STV

It was just an example. As a few people have suggested, just lowering the min level by 10 could work. I also have not heard of red quests before, but any normal quest could become a red quest if it was from 5-10 levels above your current level.

[Volibear]

Well Blizzard could just add in a feature that if a character was 10 or more levels higher than you, their contributions would not contribute to the quest completion. There must be some way to prevent this kind of exploitation.

You could still have someone not in a party kill shit for you once you've tagged it.

[Alexanderjac]

You could still have someone not in a party kill shit for you once you've tagged it.

I'm trying to think of a way to prevent this without allowing people to grief other players by destroying tagged quest mobs.

An idea that I have is that if a character higher than the current level of a zone was to attack a mob already tagged by another player, he would be flagged for 'scaling'. This would be similar to flagging yourself to pvp and what it does is scale your level and gear down to a level that would be on par with the enemy you attacked.

[Lochton]

Sounds like an okay idea, of course, rewards should be granted at the level you are at and not the level the quest is ment to be.