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%

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
I think this thread pretty much has folks in one of two camps. Those that like to play D&D, and those that like to play D&D but actually want to play GURPS/HERO System. At least in spirit. D&D is alluring in it's simplistic base: "Go confront bad guys in their lair, kill them, take their stuff; rinse and repeat". That's D&D at it's core. I think the 5e system's level advancement is just fine, pretty dang good actually. If a player is finding they want more "niggly noodly bits to fiddle around with", well, that's not 5e and probably (hopefully) never will be. IMHO, of course. :)

I don’t think that’s quite fair. Just because someone finds 5e’s character advancement less than satisfying doesn’t mean they’d secretly rather be playing GURPS. Just because someone likes mechanical customization doesn’t mean “niggly noodly bits to fiddle around with” is what they want out of that customization. I happen to find 5e characters a little too homogeneous for my taste, but that doesn’t mean I would prefer 3e. Quite the contrary, I would much rather play 5e than, say, Pathfinder.

There is a whole lot of middle ground between 5e and GURPS, and I don’t think it’s at all reasonable to say that if you don’t like one you must want the other.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

If you were a redbox player, then you remember gaining a level when it was, "Roll a d6. 3. OK, add 3 to your HP. Alright, level up done!"

3.5 had an issue with "dead levels", where you would also gain a level, and nothing but HP.
(Not targeting you specifically, but you give the most relevant quote.)

I've always found that there was more of an issue with the perception of dead levels, rather than the dead levels themselves. I played a lot of fighters, back in 2E, and I certainly never felt like I was missing out by not getting something new every level. After all, nobody else was getting anything new, either. Even the wizard was stuck with the spells they started with, unless they somehow acquired new spell scrolls during gameplay, and I was as likely to find a new sword as they were to find a useful spell scroll. The few times I played something like a paladin, it was always weird to think that there were abilities that my class actually had, but somehow I couldn't use them yet.

With third edition, most classes were put into a situation where they gained something later on, and of course spellcasters gained new spells at every level. It changed the expectation for what advancement was supposed to look like, such that anyone who didn't get something every level was seen as missing out. This culminated in classes having their dead levels filled with pointless bookkeeping abilities, like the Pathfinder fighter gaining a +1 bonus to Will saves against fear effects.

Looking at a rogue in 3E or 5E (or especially Pathfinder), and comparing against a thief in 2E, I just see needless complexity. If ninety percent of the class abilities were removed from every class, it would mean less homework to do before playing the game, and the actual gameplay wouldn't suffer at all.
 
Last edited:

Olive

Explorer
I don’t think that’s quite fair. Just because someone finds 5e’s character advancement less than satisfying doesn’t mean they’d secretly rather be playing GURPS. Just because someone likes mechanical customization doesn’t mean “niggly noodly bits to fiddle around with” is what they want out of that customization. I happen to find 5e characters a little too homogeneous for my taste, but that doesn’t mean I would prefer 3e. Quite the contrary, I would much rather play 5e than, say, Pathfinder.

There is a whole lot of middle ground between 5e and GURPS, and I don’t think it’s at all reasonable to say that if you don’t like one you must want the other.

Yes this - I'd rather not be told that because I have preferences and miss something about 3e then I am not playing DnD or would rather be playing other things.
 

Kite474

Explorer
Yeah things sort of lack oomph at leveling up. It helps that everything in 5e is so standard that things just kind of blur into it.

At the same time maybe im just getting tired of D&D after taking a trip through other games the flaws of D&D both as a franchise and as a system are starting to become more and more noticable.
 

Olive

Explorer
At the same time maybe im just getting tired of D&D after taking a trip through other games the flaws of D&D both as a franchise and as a system are starting to become more and more noticable.

This may also be my problem! I do think 5e is the best version of D&D thus far but I am pretty excited to play some Delta green or WFRP next.
 

Kite474

Explorer
This may also be my problem! I do think 5e is the best version of D&D thus far but I am pretty excited to play some Delta green or WFRP next.

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
 

Zaukrie

New Publisher
Hmmmm.....I don't think it is lights and trumpets and even the joy of picking among options (for that that like that) that some of us miss.....it's options. As a DM, I miss options for monsters to choose from in combat, for example.....The game, and it's simplicity has many advantages, but that doesn't mean it is perfect.
 

Raith5

Adventurer
For martial characters, not nearly as interesting to me as 4th edition with all its Powers or Feats to choose from almost every level as well as Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies. Casters however have lots of fun.

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. While I liked 4e I dont think we that many choices! But yes I would like to have more decisions and feats than in offer in the 5e both to have a few more choices in combats and to develop my archetype more.

This sense of lack of options is compounded for me by the decreased presence of magic items in 5e. While I am 7th level I dont have any magic items and I dont seem to have any options to spend money on in 5e to get better quality gear. So apart from some cosmetic things, I have problems with customization in a broader sense. I enjoy the game overall, but yes I think progression is an issue.
 

ad_hoc

(they/them)
Hmmmm.....I don't think it is lights and trumpets and even the joy of picking among options (for that that like that) that some of us miss.....it's options. As a DM, I miss options for monsters to choose from in combat, for example.....The game, and it's simplicity has many advantages, but that doesn't mean it is perfect.

Not pleasing everyone is not a fault. D&D is not a catch all game for everyone. It has goals and achieves those goals. Some aren't going to like those goals and that's fine.
 

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.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top