D&D (2024) Split the Players Handbook into two books: Lower Tiers and Upper Tiers

[d24454_modern]

And yet most games don't even reach that level, let alone going past it? So, how is 11th level "mid level" and where is it presented that way?

Even WotC identifies tier 1 as Local "Heroes" and tier 2 as Regional "Heroes", while in tiers 3 and 4 PCs become "Masters of ...".

You are clearly beyond "hero" by tier 3 IMO. YMMV, it appears.


Yeah, ok, I think your views are seriously distorted, but hey--experiences differ so I suppose if that is your experience, so be it.

It reads like Alexander the Great’s accomplishments. It seems big because the scope is so limited.

 

[DND_Reborn]

It reads like Alexander the Great’s accomplishments. It seems big because the scope is so limited.

Wait. Are you honestly saying that Alexander the Great's accomplishments weren't--well, great?

 

[d24454_modern]

Wait. Are you honestly saying that Alexander the Great's accomplishments weren't--well, great?

I can’t tell if this is a joke or not, so I’m gonna answer honestly and say “No”. Most people in the world at the time hadn’t even heard of him.

Of course we only care about Northern Eurasia. Nowhere else really matters./s

 

[Yaarel]

It forces nothing of the kind. 3e had the Epic Level Handbook, and it was hardly ever referred to after it was published. I think there was one epic adventure published in the entire 3e era, and it was in Dungeon. There may be more I'm unaware of, but, well, if there are, there certainly aren't many.

The 3e Epic Level Handbook for 3e levels 21 on up was doomed from the start because the 3e game engine collapsed long before these levels.

In 3e, the sweet spot, where the game engine mechanics worked well is roughly level 9: playable at tiers 5-8, and 9-12, but straining during 13-16, and less playable at 17-20. So by the time the Epic Level 21 becomes usable, few if any campaigns exist at those levels.

Similarly, 1e and 2e have the sweet spot roughly at level 7, and working well enough at 5-8, but straining at 9-12, and less playable from 13 and up.

4e intentionally prolongs the sweet spot across 5-8, 9-12, plus 13-16. Its epic levels at 21 on up are playable.

Note, the four-level "Master" tier at 9-12 are distinctive, have many popular adventures for these levels across editions, and feel different from the 5-8 tier before it and the 13-16 tier after it.

 

[d24454_modern]

The 3e Epic Level Handbook for levels 21 on up was doomed from the start because the 3e game engine collapsed long before these levels.

In 3e, the sweet spot, where the game engine mechanics worked well is roughly level 9: playable at tiers 5-8, and 9-12, but straining during 13-16, and less playable at 17-20. So by the time the Epic Level 21 becomes usable, few if any campaigns exist at those levels.

Similarly, 1e and 2e have the sweet spot roughly at level 7, and working well enough at 5-8, but straining at 9-12, and less playable from 13 and up.

4e intentionally prolongs the sweet spot across 5-8, 9-12, plus 13-16. Its epic levels at 21 on up are playable.

Note, the four-level "Master" tier at 9-12 are distinctive, have many popular adventures for these levels across editions, and feel different from the 5-8 tier before it and the 13-16 tier after it.

Define “collapse”. To me it reminds me of people’s complaints about Pokémon Legends: Arceus where a lot of players couldn’t adjust to the new battle system.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I can’t tell if this is a joke or not, so I’m gonna answer honestly and say “No”. Most people in the world at the time hadn’t even heard of him.

Of course we only care about Northern Eurasia. Nowhere else really matters./s

At this point, you really don't seem to have a clue what you are even talking about, so conversation over. Bye.

 

[the Jester]

The 3e Epic Level Handbook for 3e levels 21 on up was doomed from the start because the 3e game engine collapsed long before these levels.

That's rather beside the point, though.

My 3e epic group made it to the mid-30s. The game was still fun- in fact, it was awesome, and allowed insane crazy stuff to happen. It was a blast.

In 3e, the sweet spot, where the game engine mechanics worked well is roughly level 9: playable at tiers 5-8, and 9-12, but straining during 13-16, and less playable at 17-20. So by the time the Epic Level 21 becomes usable, few if any campaigns exist at those levels.

Less balanced, a lot more work, but still playable, I assure you, because we did it.

I totally agree that there were problems with 3e at high levels, but those were systemic issues that ran through the whole game. And I also agree that few campaigns exist at the highest levels. But imagine how many there might be if WotC released an actual GOOD adventure that ran from, say, levels 8 to epic. A good adventure inspires dms and can show them the range of possibilities in the high levels.

Similarly, 1e and 2e have the sweet spot roughly at level 7, and working well enough at 5-8, but straining at 9-12, and less playable from 13 and up.

Here, I have to strongly disagree. We had pcs in 1e up to about 37th level eventually, which were largely converted straight to 2e (absent players excepted) when it came out. I never found high level 1e or 2e to strain, like you describe.

Heck, you had to get to name level to even get your followers!

4e intentionally prolongs the sweet spot across 5-8, 9-12, plus 13-16. Its epic levels at 21 on up are playable.

Now here we agree. I'd love to see OneD&D take a lot from 4e epic stuff. Epic destinies were amazing.

 

[Yaarel]

Define “collapse”. To me it reminds me of people’s complaints about Pokémon Legends: Arceus where a lot of players couldn’t adjust to the new battle system.

4e was the first D&D edition to understand how the ecology of the game engine works.

Earlier editions, 1e-2e and 3e, would treat different kinds of mechanics as if different kinds of flavor. Thus the mechanics become imbalanced at different levels. The ad-hoc incompatible mechanics riddle the earlier editions, choking their game engines until they can no longer function as a gaming system.

 

[Yaarel]

Wait. Are you honestly saying that Alexander the Great's accomplishments weren't--well, great?

By the way, there is a difference between a historically accurate Alexander the Great who is a successful military tactician versus a mythologically accurate Alexander the Great who is a Greek demigod.

The mythological Alexander is an excellent example for the Upper Tier Players Handbook. Having become king by the end of the lower tiers, he now seeks to change the known world. Eventually gaining demigod status at 17-20 and epic status at 21-24.

 

[Yaarel]

That's rather beside the point, though.

My 3e epic group made it to the mid-30s. The game was still fun- in fact, it was awesome, and allowed insane crazy stuff to happen. It was a blast.


Less balanced, a lot more work, but still playable, I assure you, because we did it.

I totally agree that there were problems with 3e at high levels, but those were systemic issues that ran through the whole game. And I also agree that few campaigns exist at the highest levels. But imagine how many there might be if WotC released an actual GOOD adventure that ran from, say, levels 8 to epic. A good adventure inspires dms and can show them the range of possibilities in the high levels.

Here, I have to strongly disagree. We had pcs in 1e up to about 37th level eventually, which were largely converted straight to 2e (absent players excepted) when it came out. I never found high level 1e or 2e to strain, like you describe.

Heck, you had to get to name level to even get your followers!


Now here we agree. I'd love to see OneD&D take a lot from 4e epic stuff. Epic destinies were amazing.

Indeed, the "crazy" high levels are awesome! That is why I like high level characters.

But the DM needs to do pretty much all of the work.

3e and earlier never supported the high levels well.