D&D 5E Losing Interest in Character/ Class?

[DND_Reborn]

So, I have a Sorlock (Sorcerer 3/ Warlock 3) in our CoS game and after reaching level 6, I feel like I am disappointed where the two classes go from here--I just have no interest in them.

This got me thinking about my mindset with 5E. With the features you get, I find myself more thinking about my character, level, and what features I want next--and where might I get them. Now, I do this with the character concept/story in mind, not just to min/max them or anything.

But it is vastly different from my 1E/2E experience. Then, it was always about the next adventure, and without the choices for the character, I never had to worry about it.

This sensation makes my characters in 5E feel less valuable to me since they become more a collection of abilities and features instead of a persona.

I am curious if other players run into this? And I wonder if it is also a big part of why games sort of die out around levels 6-10?

 

[Charlaquin]

I think if you’re more excited about your character’s abilities than the adventures they’ll be going on, the problem lies not with the design of the game, but with the adventures you’re playing.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I think if you’re more excited about your character’s abilities than the adventures they’ll be going on, the problem lies not with the design of the game, but with the adventures you’re playing.

No, that isn't it. I love the adventures and I'm having a lot of fun playing in CoS and our other game, where we are on the last stage of AtG.

It is definitely more about a lack of interest in where the classes go. For instance, with the Sorlock I am considering MCing into Fighter and taking EK since I have a DEX 14 and INT 13. The character has grown as a Shadow Sorcerer/ Hexblade Warlock more into a "fighter", so the progression seems natural in developing the PC. Also, I have more interest in the features from changing to a new class than sticking with either Sorcerer or Warlock (frankly speaking, the 6th level features for both subclass neither fit the character concept, nor are they appealing regardless).

 

[FrogReaver]

So, I have a Sorlock (Sorcerer 3/ Warlock 3) in our CoS game and after reaching level 6, I feel like I am disappointed where the two classes go from here--I just have no interest in them.

This got me thinking about my mindset with 5E. With the features you get, I find myself more thinking about my character, level, and what features I want next--and where might I get them. Now, I do this with the character concept/story in mind, not just to min/max them or anything.

But it is vastly different from my 1E/2E experience. Then, it was always about the next adventure, and without the choices for the character, I never had to worry about it.

This sensation makes my characters in 5E feel less valuable to me since they become more a collection of abilities and features instead of a persona.

I am curious if other players run into this? And I wonder if it is also a big part of why games sort of die out around levels 6-10?

Happens to me when I only play a character to try out new mechanics or combos. The character quickly gets boring. I suggest going for quircky fun personalities on such characters - ones that will get them in trouble just enough (and thus mitigating some of your optimizing in play).

 

[Don Durito]

So, I have a Sorlock (Sorcerer 3/ Warlock 3) in our CoS game and after reaching level 6, I feel like I am disappointed where the two classes go from here--I just have no interest in them.

This got me thinking about my mindset with 5E. With the features you get, I find myself more thinking about my character, level, and what features I want next--and where might I get them. Now, I do this with the character concept/story in mind, not just to min/max them or anything.

But it is vastly different from my 1E/2E experience. Then, it was always about the next adventure, and without the choices for the character, I never had to worry about it.

This sensation makes my characters in 5E feel less valuable to me since they become more a collection of abilities and features instead of a persona.

I am curious if other players run into this? And I wonder if it is also a big part of why games sort of die out around levels 6-10?

I've seen it and I've felt it in just about every game. There does seem to be a dead area around level 6 or so.
It's one major reason why I prefer OSR games or OSR alikes like Castles and Crusades.

I do think it can be combatted however, but it takes GM finangling. (which is why I'm ok about GMing 5E but it doesn't excite me much as a player).

I think the following help:

• no feats or limiting feats that encourage builds - keep feats such as resilient that can help react to circumstances or needs in play. (The problem with planning builds is that once they are effectively achieved, interest can wane as people start planning out the next concept).
• multiclassing (the same - don't allow it, or only under special circumstance)
• Important magic items - these are things gained through play - therefore they're an incentive to hold onto and keep playing the character as the next character won't have them.
• start finangling the rules to reflect play. Give 'boon' abilities that function a bit like magic items. E.g. maybe the fighter got turned to stone in a combat and had to be revived, maybe allow him to have some kind of stoneskin ability used once a day as he's absorbed part of that magic.
• Let characters get proficiency in things they want to spend effort in things that aren't clearly covered by existing rules eg. if a character wants to spend time improving a castle or city's defences let them have proficiency in "siegecraft" if they spend significant time at sea give them proficiency in "sailing". If the fighter spends time training a militia give him proficiency in "military training". (You can even make these half proficiency - it just helps if the character sheet tells a story).
• things like castles, allies, a house, a growing reputation etc. When they visit the king he's heard of them by name, they visit a tavern and a bard is telling a story about them etc

Basically put lots of focus on all the cool stuff they've achieved with these particular characters, that could be built on further, but would be lost if you just started a new campaign. Encourage them to really see the characters as people who have achieved a lot and been through some sh*t.

There's a whole lot of setting stuff to, ie building central setting mysteries and the like, but I imagine that's pretty obvious.

 

[FrogReaver]

I think you are right that having less choice after class creation helps with what you are saying.

My favorite characters in 5e:
Cooter: Hillbilly Fighter with the hand crossbow combow that would fight very tactically with a survivalist mindset but would also do things like ride the phase spider - because "Watch this!"

Lodu: Fighter / Wizard - focused on knowledge over safety with a mad scientist vibe. Wanted to experiment on everything while taking meticulous notes. Designed him to not have consistently effective spells but to have a list that would provide an answer to most situations we encountered. Didn't last long as for some reason he defaulted to party front liner more often than not (only one with any melee class levels will do that early). But he died after having saved the party from a TPK. Silent Image of a cave collapse FTW! But one enemy stayed around and got him!

NeedsAHug: Trollkin Barbarian Rogue - very low intelligence which I play as opinionated but able to be talked out of incredibly bad decisions if the party tries hard enough. But in case he doesn't he can take a beating and or run away when he does something tooo dumb. He's also the closest thing to a tank I've played in 5e. 3d6 + Mod damage on OA from sneak attack and will scale as I get more rogue levels!

 

[FrogReaver]

I've played monks and sorcerers and clerics and most of them were getting boring - though I think it's mostly about the personality I assign to them.

 

[Dragongrief]

What is/was the concept for your character?

For the game I'm currently in, I started off with a skills & utility concept. Basically someone who was very useful outside of combat, and left the serious fighting to others.

I went with an Entertainer (who he is) Rogue (what he does when things go south). That lead into multi-classing as a bard (lore), which put even more emphasis on being a utility character. Incredibly fun to play, but not the most useful in a fight (very good at avoiding them though).

 

[Sword of Spirit]

This is interesting, because what you seem to be saying is that the game is more interesting when you have few class choices after initial character creation, like in 1e/2e. And you're seeing 5e as giving you too many of them.

Whereas I've seen multiple others (on different threads) give exactly the opposite opinion: that the game is more interesting when you have more class choices after character creation, and they see 5e as giving them too few.

Personally, I'm probably somewhere in the middle. I lean more towards your preferences--I'd rather choose the class that fits, and then focus on interacting with the game world rather than with the character-building rules.

In this particular situation, do you feel that using multi-classing is hurting rather than helping here? Would it work better if you just elected not to use multiclassing and feats?

 

[Don Durito]

This is interesting, because what you seem to be saying is that the game is more interesting when you have few class choices after initial character creation, like in 1e/2e. And you're seeing 5e as giving you too many of them.

Whereas I've seen multiple others (on different threads) give exactly the opposite opinion: that the game is more interesting when you have more class choices after character creation, and they see 5e as giving them too few.

I think there's a balance to be struck here. The desire to gain new features as you level up is a strong motivator and can help to keep a longer campaign going. But, it can also backfire somewhat, get players too addicted and they can become more focused on the features then things they achieve in the actual game.

Part of the fun of all WOTC games is the desire to look ahead and plan characters and think of combinations of powers (even 5E seems to encourage this is certain players even though it's vastly cut down from previous editions). From experience I have found this tendency somewhat dangerous to a good game.