D&D General 70% Of Games End At Lvl 7?

[the Jester]

Could you share roughly how much time these were in length, and hours per session?

Generally years long, with lots of sessions that ranged from 3 to 8 hours. I can't really be more specific- each was different, and the rate of leveliing varied by edition and by what the pcs were doing (I have almost always run pretty sandboxy games where the risk and reward level is controlled to some extent by the players).

I will say that the earlier the edition, the more play we tended to get in and the longer the sessions tended to be. And 1e and 2e took a lot longer to level up in, in terms of number of sessions/hours of play.

What positive factors did you find helpful in each of above groups?

I'm not entirely sure what you're asking here. I guess the basic answer for me is good players who want to play the game, and are interested in the world at large.

 

[jmartkdr2]

So, I know I'm replying to myself, but there's some expansion we can do on this idea.

When a player creates a character, they likely have some core idea of who the character is/will be, or what the player wants to do with them. Maybe it is a matter of tactical powers, or theme, or exploring personality, or whatever. And, yes, it is great to play through a period of growth into that concept.

But the player isn't going to plan to have that growth take years of real time. Real life is too short for that. So, plans are going to be to reach that core concept pretty quickly. And once the player reaches and explores that core concept... they've achieved what they set out to do with the campaign.

Unless the campaign gives the player a really enticing reason to redefine what the core concept of the character will be, the player's need to continue playing that same character is going to drop off.

And just having tiers of new powers probably isn't enough to really fire the player up to redefine their character. You have to reignite their imagination around the character, not just offer MOAR P0WRZ!

Where I have seen this work 9 times out of ten it’s because the pc found a leadership position in universe: like the old-school “getting a keep” but generally much looser in terms of rules.

But that does redefine the character by a massive horizontal power boost, so your point stands.

 

[Umbran]

Where I have seen this work 9 times out of ten it’s because the pc found a leadership position in universe: like the old-school “getting a keep” but generally much looser in terms of rules.

Sure, there several ways to pull off the trick. But doing so for the entire party at once may be more awkward than just starting a new campaign.

 

[jayoungr]

DM quits/can't be bothered is main reason imho.

I suspect "School year/summer ends" is another factor.

 

[Lanefan]

Yeah I'm thinking if this stat was similar back in the day all those XYZ 5/PrC2/PrC1/PrC3 type builds were essentially theory crafting.

I did have suspicions in 2002 after watching casuals play vs online assumptions.

And the rapid death of 4E. Fixed problems most groups won't see. 3.x played casually 3-7 is mostly fine imho.

Looking at what ex TSR veneers have said I suspect it was similar 1980s

The TSR editions (other than BECMI) tended to kinda tap out around 12th if not sooner, with the "sweet spot" being about 3rd-8th.

3e extended the sweet spot up to maybe 11th but also made level advancement much faster, thus the actual number of session spent playing in that sweet-spot range didn't increase.

 

[Lanefan]

It would a disaster a of Biblical proportion. Real wrath of god type stuff. Fire and Brimstone coming down from the sky, rivers and seas boiling! 40 years of darkness. Earthquakes! Volcanoes! The dead rising from their graves! Human sacrifices! Dogs & cats living together...mass hysteria!

What level spell is this one?

 

[CleverNickName]

Most of our campaigns last until 14th or 15th level, but our most recent one went all the way to 20th. ("Never again," we all agreed.)

 

[Lanefan]

The WotC's 1999 market surveys, if I recall correctly, said that most campaigns tended to last about 12-18 months. And that's not about level achieved, so much as time the group can expect to want to or be able to commit to playing the same stuff.

That might be in part because they threw out all the data from the older - and thus likelier to be longer-term players - respondents.

 

[Lanefan]

I have two types of characters, static ones and then ones with a story to resolve. Static ones are just ones that have personality that is fun to play (and hopefully fun for others to interact with) but they are not expected to significantly change. I mean they will evolve over time, but they do not have some conflict or story to resolve.

These are always good. I sometimes find my long-term characters switching between static and story-resolving and back depending on the ebb and flow of what's going on in the game.

Such characters can be fun, but most memorable ones are the second type, ones with some trauma, conflict, etc that defines them, and which they need to confront and resolve. But with the latter type I find that when their story has been successfully "concluded" I lose interest in them. I did what i wanted to do with them, and now I want to play someone else.

Which is fine, but doing so doesn't require a whole new campaign. What's stopping you from playing one or more new characters in the same existing campaign that's already running? (assuming the DM is willing to keep it going, of course)

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Which is fine, but doing so doesn't require a whole new campaign. What's stopping you from playing one or more new characters in the same existing campaign that's already running? (assuming the DM is willing to keep it going, of course)

Switching characters can sometimes work, but often the characters become so entangled with the story of the campaign that it would be awkward to switch, especially if some several players did so. And furthermore the situation might be such that the character would not plausibly "leave" or "quit." Like they need to save the world or some boring crap like that and the campaign is about it, and they cannot just give up because the player wants to play another character. Though I probably agree with you that I prefer more sandboxy campaign structures without such "main plot" which largely avoids or at least minimises these issues.