• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E 5E is attempting to recalibrate our expectations

Well, the bit about the game transforming from gritty low-level heroes who become wuxia masters and then superheroes isn't how the game played before 3.X (and 4E) - or so I've been told (I haven't heard about many high-level and epic-level 1E and 2E characters).

What WotC seems to want to do with 5E is recalibrate D&D's own expectations for itself in order to return to that lower power-level across all of the levels. That is, it wants the gritty feeling to last more than five levels...quite possibly a lot more.

This is one of the few things that I am concerned with in D&Dn - We tended to start out at 3rd, and didn't feel the game got rolling until 7th to 10th (1st edition). I GMed my wife to 34th level with a couple of characters.

I don't mind the gritty bit, as long as it can be passed quickly - to us that is almost just "played backstory" with the characters being big heroes where we want them after a few levels of play.

I much much prefer high level play over lower. I had 4 characters go epic playing 3E. I hated the Hard cap on levels in 3rd or 4E. I really hope that the top end of the game is either open ended, or has a modules to let you take a high level character and go immortal or something.

The entire idea of E6 was boggling to me. I mean I know people like that, and I understood it intellectually (hey, people like different things) but I could never understand it at an emotional level. It was like "I'm going to order a pizza, but only have 1 piece and throw the rest away"... and gets the piece with the least toppings.

Given this it is probably no surprise that the other genre I play is Superheroes. :)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

harlokin

First Post
Some want a relatively static power level without genre shifts, some want gritty to superheroes to gods.

I think there should be tiers. Either two: non-epic (linear growth) and epic (exponential); or three: heroic, paragon and epic, or whatever.

Extrapolating from the buzz E6 created, there is a sizeable subset of D&D players who want to stay low fantasy (or insert more appropriate term). Therefore, recalibrating so that (at least) levels 1-10 = real world human potential would in my opinion be a good thing.

I think the Tiers would seem to me to be the easiest way to please everyone at launch.

They can always release supplemental material for those who want to run the duration of an entire campaign at a given power level.
 

Consonant Dude

First Post
With respect though, if you are not comfortable with high-level play, it is your call whether you run it.

The problem is, if the option isn't included in the rules, it is very difficult for those who want to play higher powered campaigns to do so.

Oh, I totally get that I can choose not to use it. Here's the thing, though. I'd prefer a nice scaling down of the power curve. It looks like WotC are aware that a significant portion of DnD fans have problems with super-powered levels.

Maybe they'll offer high power rules in one of their modules instead? That could make everyone happy.
 

Yora

Legend
The thing is, I'm somewhat concerned about what gets lost in the transition. Is there no room for the game having some point where your character has justifiably graduated to being measurably better than ordinary people? Or even so powerful that he's practically a demigod in the campaign world? I'm surprised by how many people seem to think that, to whatever degree, playing a truly powerful character is anathema to what D&D is.
I think it's a perfectly valid thing to do, but as a fan of low-level play, I am very happy about getting more levels into my low-level game. If you want to play high-level, sure why not. But if high lever play could start a few levels later, we all could be happy.
I'd rather have my players stay "normal" until they reach 10th level instead of squeezing down on the XP tab and have them endure long stretches during which they can't add anything new to their characters.
 

harlokin

First Post
I think it's a perfectly valid thing to do, but as a fan of low-level play, I am very happy about getting more levels into my low-level game. If you want to play high-level, sure why not. But if high lever play could start a few levels later, we all could be happy.
I'd rather have my players stay "normal" until they reach 10th level instead of squeezing down on the XP tab and have them endure long stretches during which they can't add anything new to their characters.

I agree. If we go back to the ol' 36 levels, there's plenty of room for all power levels.
 

erleni

First Post
I personally hate gritty games and like the 4ed approach. PCs are heroes and should look more like a Bruce Willis character than a medieval time foot soldier. But YMMV...
 

Tallifer

Hero
I think there should be a module offering rules for play below level 1. Another thread talked about these Apprentice Levels. That would extend the feeling of grit and hopelessness for another five levels.

On the other end, there should be a truly epic, immortal module.
 

harlokin

First Post
I think there should be a module offering rules for play below level 1. Another thread talked about these Apprentice Levels. That would extend the feeling of grit and hopelessness for another five levels.

On the other end, there should be a truly epic, immortal module.

Agree (but can't give out any more Experience). :)
 

My problem is that my players absolutely HATE playing at the "fight rats in the basement" level of the game. Where the wizard has 2-3 spells and gets taken out with one hit. If there's no real difference between a 1st level character and a 3rd level character, they're going to insist I start even a low-level game at 5th or so.

5e better have a good assortment of things for adventurers to do at low levels at this rate.
 


Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top