D&D (2024) Will we get 5 tiers of game in 5.5 insted of current 4?

[Micah Sweet]

They could take a page from the OSR. In ACKS, leveling ends more or less at 11 with the PCs engaging in kingdom-building at that point. High level spells are now rituals you have to find or create.

 

[Micah Sweet]

To quite.
after you got certain number of at-will, encounter, daily, that number stayed the same. You got new powers instead of old ones.

Except a lot of the new powers were the same power with higher numbers.

 

[Umbran]

I disagree. TSR reserved high levels for kingdom-building

With respect, in AD&D they gave you some followers, and told you jack about how to play kingdom building.

"They knew what to do with it, but didn't actually do it," seems an odd assertion.

 

[TwoSix]

Ideally, you take the interesting capstones (like Wizard signature spells) and move them to the "real-game" endpoint of about 12th level. Than you give flashy, meaningless capstones (like the Paladin super saiyan transformation) at 20 so those levels have some sort of goal.

But really, 5e is kind of set up this way already. Levels 11+ are pretty sparse in terms of novel features for classes. Spell progression mostly stops, you only get one higher level slot every 2 levels.

The most compelling change would be moving some of the interesting subclass features in the teen levels into the core levels, and then making teen level subclass features into incremental improvements (more uses, higher numbers, not new features).

 

[Umbran]

don't get me wrong, I like it too.
There should always be an option to continue to the next campaign with same charcters.
Just, the goodies need to come sooner

So, if you give the same goodies, but sooner, then you're just hitting the same problem earlier.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I fail to see the logic in these assertions. To each his own I guess. I am on the camp that wizards and other casters are on the relatively weak side now. I would rather see them with lower HP but more spell slots. And spells should do way more damage.

i am taken aback... I have seen people argue they are not OVER powered (and I disagree) but I have never seen someone say they are too weak?

 

[Micah Sweet]

With respect, in AD&D they gave you some followers, and told you jack about how to play kingdom building.

"They knew what to do with it, but didn't actually do it," seems an odd assertion.

They certainly could have done a better job, I admit. That's why I suggested ACKS as a good implementation of those ideas. I still think its the best use of higher levels.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

And this is a good thing.

why? Why is it good that no martial character without magic even at 20th level can have the versatility and power of a 5th level spell useable by 1/3 the game at level 9?

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Yes and no.
These should come with a cost. A higher exp requirement to level. But that has been abandoned a long time ago.

that doesn't work either. And if you look at the 2e (I don't know about 1e) charts it didn't even work then.

 

[Micah Sweet]

why? Why is it good that no martial character without magic even at 20th level can have the versatility and power of a 5th level spell useable by 1/3 the game at level 9?

If the game shifted away from the dungeon at that point, emphasizing non-personal combat stuff, and martial classes had more features throughout to choose from, this would not be as much of an issue. Level Up covers a lot of this.