So on one hand you want it to be higher level on the other hand you want lower levels to be less interresting?
Id like to point out that Descent into Avernus lts you go to literal hell at a pretty low level.
No, my fear is that they will nerf underdark monsters to make it less harsh.
My experience playing low level D&D adapted games says that or become boring kobold slaying game or complete unfair battles where you need to min/max your build to pun pun levels. I know that on TT is different.
Yeah, It´s a little weird that you could fight Underdark enemies at a low level, but to be honest, I prefer fighting Myconids, intellect devourers, demons and some than +100 kobolds and goblins. Good stuff.
5e is not as equipment-dependent, low-level characters are somewhat competent and the gap between levels is not that huge in terms of stats, armour, BAB, saves, etc as in previous editions ( I.E. In 5e your saves, base attack and skills improve with your proficiency after a set number of levels, in previous editions your saves, BAB, skills,... usually improves every level-up) so it could be done, I think.
For me, is on mid levels when D&D shines. Low level you have no variety. High level to epic level, is only great IF the DM is pretty smart and good. As for 5e having less gap, the 3.5e gap applies to monsters too. A skeleton chieftain can kill 40+ skeletons on 3.5e.
Levels matters less on 5e but numbers matters far more.
