D&D 5E No One Plays High Level?

[Demetrios1453]

with most of the pantheon at their side and don't forget Elves are outerplanars in that book. It wasn't mortals fighting those balrogs it was the Gods and thier most powerful outerplanar followers. They don't die they pass on to the outer realms and are reborn. All that first age stuff is basically Lucifer waging war on heaven till he loses. The second age is a bit more like DND and then the 3rd is your nitty gritty magic poor game. none of the 3 ages really merge well into DND ruleset.

No, for most of the books the elves in question had been exiled by the Valar with an explicit clause of "No help from us!"

But, if you won't give the elves their due, what about the humans and dwarves? Húrin, for example, before he's captured by Morgoth's forces, is standing on a literal hill of orcs and trolls he's killed. And that's just one example.

 

[James Gasik]

no if you have a god of death then there are rules. I'm pretty sure magically avoiding the underworld is going to be noticed eventually. Now the question is do they come for you or just wait and add it to your list of crimes. but every high level game is different and that's the DM's call.

Why would these rules not include the spells and ways one could cheat death? Perhaps the monetary cost to raise someone is actually paying tribute to the Gods of Death!

 

[kigmatzomat]

Ran a 2e from 1st to the low 20s (variable class xp)
3e came out, I ran from 1st to I think 24th.
4e was not my cup of tea, I played one game.
5e am in a game thats run from 1st to 15th, i'm hoping we get to 17 before the GM runs out of adventure path.

I like high level play from both sides of the screen. I start new players and new editions at 1st so there's more timr to learn mechanics. My campaigns tend to run for 100+ sessions so I generally only run one campaign per edition.

One thing I did was prep for high level. Not just reading but I would run 1-shots that were 5+ levels higher than normal on days the full group couldn't be there. I got an idea how it worked, players could "nova" without any long term ramifications (which is always fun), I could see how much/little impact various spells or tactics had and it made it less alien.

 

[Distracted DM]

How about no one buys high level material??

Where's this from? Pathfinder adventure paths go up to high level and folks buy those; that newest DMsGuild adventure into the hells is doing quite stellar and is 11-20.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

For those with experience in the following games, how would you rate or summarize high level play in each?

D&D 3.0
D&D 3.5
Pathfinder 1E

These three can be treated collectively because they are essentially the same game, just with a series of greater tweaks. And, having played at high level (going into early Epic), I can answer that they play...very poorly unless both player and DM are really concerted in keeping things in a narrow band of power and, for lack of a better term, "influence." Any character can be powerful at some specific thing, but high-level full spellcasters become utterly ludicrous, especially if even somewhat optimized. Pathfinder is better-worse for this, because while it took some steps here and there to address the issues, it also added a TON more power in various ways and especially for spellcasters.

And, again, I'm not talking ridiculous TO stuff where you get actual nigh-infinite loops and the like. I'm talking pure practical optimization, with conscious limits and nixing anything that would actually become infinite. Even when you close up those loopholes, 3.x is still ridiculously, hilariously broken at high levels.

There's a reason 3.x spawned the "E6" movement.

D&D 4E

I have not, sadly, had the opportunity to play high level 4e. But by design, it was meant to be "all sweet spot," so to speak, and what I hear from folks who actually did play at that level, it works...with a couple caveats. Combats can run long, so it is very important for players to know the rules for their characters and to be thinking about things between their turns, so they know what to do quickly. Hemming and hawing is a death by a thousand cuts. Also, it's best if players try to limit their off-turn actions, or pick off-turn actions that are very fast and easy to process.

D&D 5E

Have neither played nor have much desire to play high-level 5e. It is, as with most things 5e-related, analogous to 3e with an extra balance pass. Which, to be clear, that should be recognized; 5e is better-balanced than 3e. It's just...3e was so bad that "better" can mean a lot of different things. "Taller than a flea" is not exactly saying much; most things are.

Pathfinder 2E
LevelUp A5E

I have not played either of these nor read their unique rules very closely. I imagine LUA5e is better than standard 5e due to improving, to some degree, the caster/martial balance. But it will likely still suffer from the same problems as 5e, they'll just be a bit blunted. I hear PF2e is much better about balance--part of why it reminds folks of 4e D&D--but I have only barely scratched the surface of its rules.

 

[ECMO3]

The DM's Lair posted this video recently ...

In it, he discusses reasons why few people play High-Level 5e D&D.

I've been DMing for 30 years (starting in 2nd edition AD&D), and I can say that the highest level reached in any of my campaigns was around 12. My wife, who discovered the game during the 5e era, asked me recently why our games don't get to higher levels. She is beginning to feel discouraged that she'll never have a character who will be able to use "really cool abilities."

While watching the DM's Lair video, I had an epiphany: I don't think high-levels are now (or have ever been) intended to be played. It's like buying a Powerball ticket when the prize has reached $500M. It's aspirational. It's the story of the American dream - "if you just work hard enough, you too can become Jeff Bezos."

Realistically, it's never going to happen, but it's an extra power fantasy grafted on to your existing power fantasy of playing D&D.

Sure, there are going to be a handful of people who have played 18-20th level who are going to post here to prove me wrong, but I think those of us who frequent these boards have an exceptional level of interaction with the hobby.

What do you think? Do you think high-level play is actually important to the game? Do you think it's just in the book for nostalgia or window-dressing for power gamers?

I have played probably around 30 campaigns in 5E and another 100 or so 1-shots.

To date I have played 2 campaigns from 1-20 and one 20th level 1-shot. The campaigns I played are available on DMs Guild, the one shot was pulled from DOMM.

I did not experience the specific problems he cited in the video, although there were some issues with high-level play and once we got past 15 or so neither of the 1-20 games were as fun any more.

Here is the last 20th level character I played. Note equipment is not accurate as we did not do equipment on DNDB, but stats and spells are what she had at games end:

D&D Beyond Character Sheet

The World's most intelligent Dungeons and Dragons Character Sheet.

www.dndbeyond.com

 

[Reynard]

I have played probably around 30 campaigns in 5E and another 100 or so 1-shots.

To date I have played 2 campaigns from 1-20 and one 20th level 1-shot. The campaigns I played are available on DMs Guild, the one shot was pulled from DOMM.

I did not experience the specific problems he cited in the video, although there were some issues with high-level play and once we got past 15 or so niether of the games were as fun any more.

I'm curious what your definition of "campaign" is here, as the meaning of the term has kind of evolved over time.

 

[ECMO3]

For those with experience in the following games, how would you rate or summarize high level play in each?

D&D 3.0
D&D 3.5

Not fun at all.

5E admitedly had problems at high level. I feel like 3E started running into those around level 5.

D&D 5E

5E has problems, what is in the video is legit and it is very hard to DM. That said IMO 5E is the best edition I have played at high level, just like it is the best edition I have played at low and mid tier levels.

You did not ask about 1E. I played that to high level as well. 1E did not have a lot of high level problems except published monsters got pathetically easy. This was counterbalanced by the fact that surviving to high level was near impossible. Most 1E campaigns, played RAW, eventually end in a TPK.

 

[ECMO3]

I'm curious what your definition of "campaign" is here, as the meaning of the term has kind of evolved over time.

Usually something spanning multiple levels and multiple sessions with a common binding story.

In the case of 1-20 campaigns those I played were the Doomed Forgotten realms campaign and Moonshae Adventures. Both are available on DMs guild.

DFR takes place in an alternate Faerun where all the WOTC adventures ended bad - Tiamat returned in TOD, the demons took over the Underdark in OOTA, Baldurs Gate was sucked into Avernus..... The world is a hellscape and from session 1 players were on a quest to weaken and then eventually defeat Vecna who had orchestrated all this.

Moonshae Adventures campaign builds from being small town hired help to eventual epic heroes in a long story which starts out small and ends up saving the Moonshae Isles from an ancient evil. I won't go into more detail due to spoilers.

Those are both long campaigns. On the short end probably LMOP. Anything smaller than LMOP is probably not really a campaign in my definition.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

I think it is important to point out that while 4e went to level 30, all it did was stretch level 20 up to lvl 30z The highest level spell was still wish. It was just called a 29th level spell instead of a 9th level one (IIRC).

4e had wish?