D&D 5E Why Do Higher Levels Get Less Play?

[Maxperson]

Thats the high level fans want.
They want rule breakers.

The system problem is it forces characters to need to break a lot of rules to get to the end result.

You're grossly over generalizing. I've been playing high level since 2000 when 3e came out with several DMs and many, many players and I've never seen a general clamor for rule breaking PCs like hulks. Some specials have happened as a matter of course and the DM made up stuff, but it's not some general thing that high level fans want.

 

[Maxperson]

I agree you don't "need" to break the rules to play high level D&D.

Really, the FIRST thing that simply needs to be done is to let go all your ideas, feelings, thoughts, restrictions, limitations, and all other self imposed things. Embrace and accept that anything is possible....yes, even that.

And for most things needed for high level play, you can fully "follow the rules" just fine. You can add a Flaming Sword of Fire that does unique fire based effects that are NOT listed anywhere in the rules. This does not "break the rules" in anyway. It simply adds an item to the game.

Homebrew, by itself, does not "break the rules". The idea that "only the hollowed game designers" can make anything is a silly and very wrong idea.

Homebrew doesn't break the rules, but it does often change the rules. That's why there's a difference between homebrew and RAW.

 

[bloodtide]

The pit fiend lore doesn't allow for what you suggest. You'd have to change the lore to have a CR 5 or whatever pit fiend. Not that there is anything wrong with making changes like that. It's just not the game's default stance on the topic.

I guess you can point to some piece of pit fiend lore that says whatever you say it says. And sure you can say it is the 'default stance' or whatever you want.

But so what?

My point is you can flick the silly rule book off the table and do whatever you want.

Homebrew doesn't break the rules, but it does often change the rules. That's why there's a difference between homebrew and RAW.

Change is a good thing.

Sure some people have a fun game only doing what the "rules" let them do. But you do not have to play the game that way. You can do whatever you want, no matter what a "rule" says.

 

[Maxperson]

I guess you can point to some piece of pit fiend lore that says whatever you say it says. And sure you can say it is the 'default stance' or whatever you want.

But so what?

My point is you can flick the silly rule book off the table and do whatever you want.

Change is a good thing.

Sure some people have a fun game only doing what the "rules" let them do. But you do not have to play the game that way. You can do whatever you want, no matter what a "rule" says.

I mean, I'm not going to argue that homebrew isn't a good thing or that you can't/shouldn't do it. It will still be homebrew, though, which means that in general discussions if you just sort of argue that weak pit fiends are a thing, you'll get pushback. Homebrew isn't useful in most discussions.

 

[bloodtide]

I mean, I'm not going to argue that homebrew isn't a good thing or that you can't/shouldn't do it. It will still be homebrew, though, which means that in general discussions if you just sort of argue that weak pit fiends are a thing, you'll get pushback. Homebrew isn't useful in most discussions.

But how you play the game is very much useful. In fact, it is often the problem.

Question: "Why do higher levels get less play?"

Answer: "Because you play the game like a board game, have the DM act just like a player and only play the game exactly by the book with no changes or homebrew."

Solution: "Don't do the above answer".

Simple.

 

[GrimCo]

Yes, you can do what ever you want, only limit is your imagination.

Sure, i can make CR5 Balor and CR20 human bandit. ( side note, slapping pc classes on monsters isn't advisable in 5e, since they are going for different rules for pcs and monsters, which makes sense, one is designed for long haul, other is for one encounter). Point is, when it comes to high level play, it just takes more work on DM's part since out of box support is limited. PC options are limited at lower levels and it's easier to eyeball things. At high levels, PCs have way more tools and providing challenging encounters takes more work, more tinkering since there is so much more to take into account. Add to that very sparse information for new DM's how to handle it properly.

 

[pemerton]

Then I play wrong. Good to know.

I don't know where this is coming from!

 

[pemerton]

Re Pit Fiends:

Upthread I posted this:

There's an alternative reading, which is that certain sorts of "stories" are level-dependent. For instance, meeting a Pit Fiend as an equal, or carving out a kingdom to rule, or travelling places by way of teleportation - on my understanding of D&D (informed primarily by B/X, AD&D and 4e D&D), these are not things that can occur at any level.

In case of any uncertainty, when I mentioned Pit Fiends in this post I meant the beings that are close in power to, or in some cases are, Dukes of Hell.

Anyone can do whatever they want at their table - that seems pretty obvious - but D&D in which it is taken that (say) 5th level PCs are on a par with Dukes of Hell is (in my view) drifting a long way away from the game that WotC publishes and that TSR published.

 

[Minigiant]

You're grossly over generalizing. I've been playing high level since 2000 when 3e came out with several DMs and many, many players and I've never seen a general clamor for rule breaking PCs like hulks. Some specials have happened as a matter of course and the DM made up stuff, but it's not some general thing that high level fans want.

There is a major point being missed.

There are many ways to run a high level game.

High level epic fantasy is different from high level political fantasy or high level heroic fantasy or high level beer and pretzel fantasy.

WOTC supports 1 of 10 types of high level. That 1 is not the most popular type of high level fantasy.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Anyone can do whatever they want at their table - that seems pretty obvious - but D&D in which it is taken that (say) 5th level PCs are on a par with Dukes of Hell is (in my view) drifting a long way away from the game that WotC publishes and that TSR published.

Sure... but isn't the point of this thread asking why more people don't play high-level games, not why people are not choosing to play the game WotC/TSR published in the manner they did? To which one of the answers is that we just don't need to play high-level games. There is nothing high-level games have that can't also be had with lower-level games via the use of house-ruling and adjustment (regardless of what or how WotC publishes their material.)

So if it would normally take a table 2 years to reach high-level and then use the high-level material that WotC publishes for it... or tables can use that material a year-and-a-half earlier by just de-leveling it... this could explain why tables aren't bothering to go for or ever reach high-level games.