D&D 5E Anyone else finding character advancement pretty dull?

Is 5e character advancement boring?

  • Yes, extremely dull!

    Votes: 19 10.3%
  • It's fine but not more than that

    Votes: 74 40.2%
  • No, I love 5e character advancement

    Votes: 82 44.6%
  • Something else

    Votes: 9 4.9%

Aldarc

Legend
I don't find it boring, but I guess I don't really play D&D for 'character advancement' so I may not be the best person to ask. For me it's about the journey, not the power-ups.
The advancement itself? No. But for many players I know it is not about the advancement in itself but about how "soon" they can play their character as conceived, what we could call the "Baseline Self-Image Character." If you are wanting to play, for example, a rogue who uses magic to shift invisible in combat, then advancement is the means to the end of reaching the abilities of a 7th level Arcane Trickster. Or you may require a bit more time to get to your baseline self-image character because you require multiclassing to get there.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

delericho

Legend
Everyone's 2nd or 3rd favourite game? The sales numbers alone disagree with this. I would imagine it is the only game that most players have played, making it, by default, most people's favourite game.

Vanilla ice cream is by far the best selling flavour of ice cream, yet there aren't too many people who would list it as their favourite. It has two great selling points - firstly, it's a wonderful common ground (group A likes rocky road but not mint choc chip; group B likes mint choc chip... they compromise on vanilla because while it's not their favourite they don't mind it); secondly, it's a really good base for adding other flavours.

D&D 5e of course has a third great selling point - it's much easier to find a group playing D&D than any other RPG. And, indeed, it's much easier to find a group playing 5e than any other edition.
 

Also - it has become quite evident they will happily use any excuse for NOT doing anything.

You could start to wonder if they don't want to rock the boat, but I think the answer is what it always was:

5E is developed by a minimal crew to maintain the brand until Hasbro can diverge into the real money making branches: movies, action figures...

The main reason we're not getting much crunch is because we're collectively letting WotC get away with not providing it.

While it is totally right that the are working on a minimal crew, it is always the same crew which males it consistent. And as you can see in the poll, there are more happy customers than unhappy. And last bit not least, although I really do like crunch, no crunch is better than bad crunch or bloat.

Also the same people accusing wotc for being lazy would call them money grabbers if they realeased more untested material.
Maybe you should start designing an advanced players book yourself. You seem to have plenty of time and on DM's guild you may release what you want. Might be a good book. Might be not.
 

TwoSix

Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer
I think for me the moment was when I finally got around to playing Shadow of the Demon Lord and during play something just clicked in me that made me go "This is everything I have wanted D&D to be"... Well except maybe in the fluff department and some other odds and ins but eh 6 out of 7 aint bad
Mostly off-topic, but I finally picked up the Shadow of the Demon Lord pdf after seeing several recommendations, and holy crap, is that system awesome.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
I guess, in theory, the 5e system *should* encourage quicker levelling although there still seems to be many occasion in our games where a player levelled up in the last session but still leaves it until the start of the next to prepare and then spends 30 mins deciding which 1 feat/spell they will pick :)

I wish I could give more than one XP for this. :lol:
 

TwoSix

Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer
I said that 5e is "fine". And it really is. It's good even. I do have issues with it, however.

1e and 2e, honestly, felt very blah. Gaining levels through level 8 felt very powerful, especially for multiclass characters, but realistically it felt like diminishing returns set in pretty quickly since all you really got were nonweapon proficiencies, better attack and save bonuses, more HP, and, if you were lucky, better skills or spells. It didn't feel bad to gain levels, but you didn't really know any better, either, and since it was so easy to lose levels, you didn't (or we didn't) so much measure yourself against them.

In 3.x and Pathfinder (even PF2 from what it looks like) it doesn't feel to me like you've got a complete character until about level 8. And that's way too late because the campaign is half over by then. You're still picking up basic features until then, and if you're interested in a prestige class, you often never felt like your character had started until you reached a given PrC level and picked up that core ability you were lacking. It's one of the things I grew to dislike about 3.x. It felt very viscerally enjoyable to dig through 5 different books for the perfect abilities and classes in 3.x, but that feeling didn't really translate well into gameplay. 3.x felt like it had a very good minigame for building a character, but that what it lacked was a good system for making that character feel like it was complete or whole during play. For PF2, I think what really kills it for me is the fact that Ancestry (i.e., Racial) and Skill abilities are gained as you progress in levels. To me, it looks like level 1 in PF2 is a paper doll with perhaps 4 abilities. I don't know. The whole system for PF2 just turns me off in a very straightforward way.

In 5e, to me, you feel very weak levels 1 and 2, but they're short. Then every character feels established by level 3, and feels like an experienced character by level 5. By level 8 you feel quite heroic. By level 11, you feel like a powerful veteran. Most characters will have a 20 in their primary stat by this point. I absolutely love character progression through level 11. It is as close to perfect as it's ever been. However, level 11 is what I consider the end of real character development. I say that because, for essentially all classes, levels 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 feel completely dead. Those levels are just a slog. For just about every class (and certainly for every class I've played) there is no ability that feels worthwhile at those six levels -- with the obvious exception of new spell levels and possibly Slippery Mind (Rogue) and Diamond Body (Monk). Maybe they're just trying to put a plateau in the middle of the game before 9th level spells, but in my experience it just lasts too long, and I'd frankly be fine with 9th level spells showing up after the "end" of the traditional game. They kind of always have anyways. Level 3 you feel like the class you selected, level 5 you feel experienced, level 11 you feel like a powerful veteran. And then nothing changes until level 18. Even your attack bonus or spell DC doesn't improve much compared to the first half of the game. It should be +5 at level 1, up to +9 at level 11, and then to +11 at level 20?

Beginning with level 12, it feels to me like nobody gets anything interesting (beyond new spell levels) until you hit level 18. Most classes just have "Hey, you know that thing you do sometimes? It's trivially better now or you can do it once more per rest!" and they stick that on the class table and say it's not a dead level. Yeah, that's still a dead level. Every time I see an ability like that I think, "The Rogue doesn't have +1d6 as their class ability every other level, and that's a better new ability than I'm getting right now. The Rogue gets a new ability *and* his existing ability improves." Maybe it's because I played a Rogue first. It just doesn't feel good to advance your character beginning about level 12 and lasting until you get to the capstone levels (18+).

Speaking of capstone levels, I would much rather take all those interesting and game-changing abilities that classes currently get at levels 18, 19, and 20 and move them to levels 13, 14, and 15. Then, get rid of all the chaff they give you at those levels currently, and for levels 16 through 20 just give every class an Ability Score Increase every level. Or, heck, have two ASIs per level. Just stop putting fun and interesting things at endgame levels because nobody gets to play with them. They're all carrots that nobody ever gets to, and even when you do manage to get to them, you only have them for like for six weeks after playing a year and a half. Just give us the carrots and make the end of the game just actual diminishing returns. Advancement stops at level 20 because you've reached the pinnacle of mortal advancement, and it tapers off well before then. And that's completely fine to me. Levels 16 to 20 are almost always about wrapping up the campaign or doing a fifth season of Babylon 5 because the players don't want to quit.
I think moving the capstones down to the 13-15 range makes a lot of sense. But I do think the current design makes a lot of sense. I want to character to feel fully realized in the 5-6 range, and then feel like a more powerful version of that concept with some new tricks by the time I get to 11+. I think you're spot on in that the best thing to change would be to move the "plateau levels" from 13-18 up to 16-20.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Agree. I play a barbarian in 5e and while it is fun, I do have problems with the lack of progression choices for martial types. The only thing that has significantly changed in the 7 levels I have been playing is hp.
Are you really arguing that having advantage on dex saves, the ability to gain advantage on an attack, picking up a feat, gaining an extra attack, moving faster, being able to act during a surprise round, taking half damage from all damage that isn't psychic, and doubling your carrying capacity and gaining advantage on feats of of strength isn't significantly different from level 1? The other 7th level barbarian types also have profound differences than a level 1 barbarian has.

I get wanting to have more choices, but that's a far cry from 7th level being the same as 1st level other than hit points.
 

guachi

Hero
It's like how some photographers are more interested in their cameras than in their photographs.

This is a roleplaying game, not a character making game...

I'm more interested in my camera than my photographs because I'm a bad photographer. (I frequent a camera gear forum)

Though there are similarities. At the end of the day the best discussions about camera gear are how they facilitate your ability to take better or different pictures. The best 5e discussions about mechanical bits and bobs are how they facilitate your ability to have a better (more fun!) or different gaming experience at the gaming table.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Supporter
Vanilla ice cream is by far the best selling flavour of ice cream, yet there aren't too many people who would list it as their favourite. It has two great selling points - firstly, it's a wonderful common ground (group A likes rocky road but not mint choc chip; group B likes mint choc chip... they compromise on vanilla because while it's not their favourite they don't mind it); secondly, it's a really good base for adding other flavours.

D&D 5e of course has a third great selling point - it's much easier to find a group playing D&D than any other RPG. And, indeed, it's much easier to find a group playing 5e than any other edition.

That gives a plausible reason.

It does not give *anything* like support. "This *sounds* true, so it is," is not a particularly strong position.

We can talk about sales - but without data, the question of "favorite" is probably speculation.
 
Last edited:

TwoSix

Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer
Are you really arguing that having advantage on dex saves, the ability to gain advantage on an attack, picking up a feat, gaining an extra attack, moving faster, being able to act during a surprise round, taking half damage from all damage that isn't psychic, and doubling your carrying capacity and gaining advantage on feats of of strength isn't significantly different from level 1? The other 7th level barbarian types also have profound differences than a level 1 barbarian has.

I get wanting to have more choices, but that's a far cry from 7th level being the same as 1st level other than hit points.
Those are all good things to gain, but the majority of those features are passive bonuses. The only features gained that enable choices are Reckless Attack and Extra Attack, and even those choices are slightly different modes of attacking. You're certainly better at running up and attacking, but you're still running up and attacking, just like you were at level 1.

I don't entirely disagree with you, but I think you and [MENTION=56051]Raith5[/MENTION] might have differing definitions of "significantly changed".
 

Remove ads

Top