D&D (2024) If Your Builds Not Online By Level 6 Dont Bother?

[Zardnaar]

I've seen comments similar to this online a lot. Combine that with WotC saying 70% of games end level 7 or lower. A typical campaign might be 6 sessions (mine are probably 20-30).

Going back further a lot of the 3.5 builds would be theorycrafting. 4E tanking I suspect was due to fixing problems the vast majority never experienced. Druid existed but also wasn't a very popular class regardless of its power. Outside that you needed generally 5 levels of XYZ and probably another 5-10 levels or prestige classes and non core options.

The theory craft meta continues on you tube. 200 damage by level 12!!! Watching the video the builds basically hot garbage until level 8 or 9.

I don't mind builds not 100% switched on until xyz but not to the extent of hot garbage. 5.5 has buffed a lot of classes anywhere between 5-8 levels for me personally before I consider multiclassing outside of say rogues and a level dip in Fighter/Paladin/Ranger maybe Sorcerer.
Missing that 3rd level spell slot or 2nd attack at 5th hurts.

 

[cbwjm]

I have a barbarian 1/wizard 4 and, while it still works, I think I'm going to be missing the lack of fireball in the upcoming session.

I remember trying to put something together in 5e that felt like the 4e swordmage which mixed abjurer with eldritch knight, it took too long to really match up to the old swordmage and the combination of classes diluted the power of the abjurer's shield.

 

[Theory of Games]

For PCs I'm usually looking at L9 as the pinnacle of the "build". That's when all the class dips develop the synergy I was after.

As a GM, unless they have a nice magic loadout, L6 PCs are bots

 

[AlViking]

I've seen comments similar to this online a lot. Combine that with WotC saying 70% of games end level 7 or lower. A typical campaign might be 6 sessions (mine are probably 20-30).

Going back further a lot of the 3.5 builds would be theorycrafting. 4E tanking I suspect was due to fixing problems the vast majority never experienced. Druid existed but also wasn't a very popular class regardless of its power. Outside that you needed generally 5 levels of XYZ and probably another 5-10 levels or prestige classes and non core options.

The theory craft meta continues on you tube. 200 damage by level 12!!! Watching the video the builds basically hot garbage until level 8 or 9.

I don't mind builds not 100% switched on until xyz but not to the extent of hot garbage. 5.5 has buffed a lot of classes anywhere between 5-8 levels for me personally before I consider multiclassing outside of say rogues and a level dip in Fighter/Paladin/Ranger maybe Sorcerer.
Missing that 3rd level spell slot or 2nd attack at 5th hurts.

I only ever play multi-class games when it makes sense for the character. On the other hand I'm also okay with being just okay with "decent" character until higher levels if it makes sense. One of my favorite characters in 3.5 didn't really achieve full potential until level 10 or so. Sadly he was a fighter type so obsolete by level 15 or so, but it was fun while it lasted.

I'm not much of a min/maxer in the sense of researching builds online. Most of them seem to exploit rules at best and flat out "misinterpret" rules.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

One would think that if the problem is "stuff never gets to come online because campaigns don't make it that far"...

The reasonable choice would be to design games such that most campaigns DO "make it that far", and then provide robust rules for playing at other paces or with other focuses.

 

[Incenjucar]

How robust and accessible is high level Adventurer's League stuff?

 

[Zardnaar]

One would think that if the problem is "stuff never gets to come online because campaigns don't make it that far"...

The reasonable choice would be to design games such that most campaigns DO "make it that far", and then provide robust rules for playing at other paces or with other focuses.

I think that's a fantasy tbh.

I know you love 4E we never made it past level 7. Alot didn't make it that far or play it at all.

It's not purely a game rules problem. It it is D&D (all of them) being a 600-1000 page rule set may be part of the problem.

If 5.5 follows the traditional trajectory I suspect complexity is part of it.

 

[Shiroiken]

I think something that people who theorycraft don't care about is how a build actually plays before being "online." Most of them seem to assume the build based on starting level. A lot of builds I've seen are really, really terrible before they get online. I've saw one in 3E that came online at level 17, but would not survive to level 3, let alone to level 17.

 

[aco175]

One would think that if the problem is "stuff never gets to come online because campaigns don't make it that far"...

The reasonable choice would be to design games such that most campaigns DO "make it that far", and then provide robust rules for playing at other paces or with other focuses.

I think that most campaigns start with the ideal of going that far, but stuff happens.

Is some of the issue with player thinking of a build that really cannot be built- or built by level 17?

Should some campaign PC ideas be limited if it going to be a short campaign of say the summer or only to level 5 like a box set?

 

[evilbob]

The reasonable choice would be to design games such that most campaigns DO "make it that far"

Apparently you, me, and Zard like the same threads

2 things:
My suspicion is that the vast majorty (80%?) of games fall apart because of the classic D&D villan: scheduling. Another small percent die due to a toxic person in the group. I suspect only a few die because of rule complexity. Maybe a bunch don't go more than one or two games because of complexity, and maybe that's what you meant, but if you get past the first couple sessions, I feel like that's not what stops you.

That's said: I believe that on a crunch scale, where 1 is freestyle and 10 is like GURPS or something, D&D 5.0 is still about a 7, and 5.5 is about an 8. So your point that reducing complexity could help is valid, and I believe there's a lot of runway there.