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

[abirdcall]

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+).

They didn't put much effort into 12+. They designed the game around levels 5-10 (which is why they last the longest). Those are the levels that most people want to play in.

Levels 12+ also go by very quickly. There is less experience required to go from 11 to 12 than from 10 to 11 and with the huge power increases it means that the party will likely be fighting enemies worth a lot more experience. So yes, the individual levels matter less, but at that point the PCs are quickly getting to the point of breaking the game anyway.

I think most people playing 12+ are in it for the end game of handling threats to the multiverse at levels 17+. So 12-16 is like 1-4, just a bridge to get to the real game at 5 or 17. And once PCs are that powerful nothing is rooted in reality anyway.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Wow...I have exactly the opposite feeling. 5e advancement is way more interesting than prior versions.*

BECMI and AD&D 1e/2e Advancement: I get hp. Sometimes I get numerical bonuses. Three or four times between levels 1-20 I get the ability to do something new. Unless I'm a caster, then I get new stuff at every spell level.

3.0/3.5: As above, except that I get numerical bonuses at every level (skill points), and I get new things more often. But most of the new things I get amount to numerical bonuses by some other name (+4 bonus to saving throws versus traps--that sort of thing). Even most feats are just numerical bonuses.

5e: Almost every level I get completely new things that I can *do*. Ways to impact the world that go beyond (though they may include) numerical bonuses.

My melee warrior caster character is leveling up and taking the Magic Initiate (Wizard) feat. He's picking gust and lightning lure, along with absorb elements. Gust allows him to push around creatures, including potentially moving allies out of melee without causing opportunity attacks on them. Lightning lure does the same thing, but can deal damage to opponents (though it is still safe to use to move allies with, as long as you don't pull them too close). Since this is level 4, I also gain a cantrip from my class. So I just gained the ability to do 3 cool things at will, and freed up a spell preparation slot for an emergency spell that you really need when you need it. (Sure, shield would have seen more use and been a more optimal pick, but absorb elements is more his style).

There are very few dead levels in 5e. You get real, impactful, new abilities. And the levels that just provide numerical bonuses, tend to be things like, "you get another attack". Pretty darn big deal, compared to "you get +1 to your attack bonus and a few skills".

It doesn't matter to me if an edition gives me more micro-choices when those choices just aren't very interesting. 5e wins hands down in giving you big, interesting features, at the cost of reducing your choice points compared to 3e. Older editions generally gave even less choices (except for weapon proficiencies in 2e, which was more of a reduction in penalties than a granting of cool).


* 4e possibly excepted for those who like it.

 

[ccs]

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.

You're the DM, why don't you give the monsters options?

 

[Guest 6801328]

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.

 

[77IM]

D&D is not a catch all game for everyone.

Actually... it kinda is, though. D&D is designed to appeal to a very, very broad fan base. So while it may not be for exactly "everyone," D&D definitely takes a sort of least-common-denominator approach to many aspects of game design. It winds up becoming most people's second- or third-favorite game; the Coca-Cola of role-playing games. This is why, for every player who finds the leveling system dull, there's another who finds it fantastic... and both of them are still playing D&D.

 

[Li Shenron]

I'm a long term D&D player, starting with Red Box but I also played a fair bit of 2e, tons of 3/3,5(& PF) and while I skipped 4e I've been playing 5e for about a year and a half now. The first year was as a DM and it was a revelation - easy to prep, easy to run and a total relief after 3.5. I played a few one shots and enjoyed the same things as a player - clear rules and little maths.

Now I've been a player for 6 months and I've noticed that I find character advancement really dull, something I never found in 3.5. Even playing as a wizard, I've found spell selection etc boring.

I know I'm not alone as a friend (not in my group) has said the same but has anyone else found this? And any thoughts on improving the situation?

No way, not at all.

5e character advancement gives you something new every single level (which didn't happen in older editions).

Levelling up is also pretty fast, meaning you should not get bored by staying too long at the same level, but this is actually a double-edge sword because levelling too fast devalues what you gain each time.

In fact, I can only imagine someone getting bored if they are playing through class levels very fast, then quickly start another game with their favourite same class again and again. Since 5e doesn't have a huge amount of material per each class, such player may end up creating clones of the same character. This is especially the case if said player has a utilitarian approach to character building i.e. always thinks in terms of "I need this spell because it's the best offense, I need this other spell because it's the best defense, I need one teleport, I need one invisibility, I need one buff...". If that's your way of thinking, you risk ending up with the same "best build" for a class each time.

Thoughts to improve the situation?

- advance more slowly and enjoy what your character can do now, as opposed to what will gain later
- focus more on the events of the adventures than the character building subgame
- when starting a new game always play a new class; if you've played them all, play a new subclass
- forget about standards, "efficiency" or filling the gaps in the party

If all else fails, while waiting for new books to give you more material, go homebrew and design unique material yourself.

 

[abirdcall]

Actually... it kinda is, though. D&D is designed to appeal to a very, very broad fan base. So while it may not be for exactly "everyone," D&D definitely takes a sort of least-common-denominator approach to many aspects of game design. It winds up becoming most people's second- or third-favorite game; the Coca-Cola of role-playing games. This is why, for every player who finds the leveling system dull, there's another who finds it fantastic... and both of them are still playing D&D.

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.

It definitely has a feel it is going for and its own design goals.

I see this time and again: "D&D doesn't allow you to do X/offer X/support X playstyle/etc. so it has big problems."

That is just the wrong way to look at it. I've seen many posts assuming that a goal of 5e/D&D is to enable the creation of any character concept which can't be further from the truth. A class based system by its very nature constrains the possibilities. And to great effect. There are a great many benefits to this which is one reason I love 5e. I get that it isn't for everyone, some people want to have a mish mash of everything they can think of in their game, but then, it's not a fault of 5e that it doesn't support that. Find another game.

 

[delericho]

Well, we are getting some indeterminate number of Subclasses in November with Ravnica..., and R&D is actively working on two whole new Classes and assorted Subclasses...

Um...

Yes, sorry, that's my bad. When counting subclasses I was in the habit of (a) not counting anything setting-specific, and (b) counting them individually by class. So my count was at something like 3 in supplemental material.

Of course, the more sensible way to count the subclasses is, well, to count the subclasses, by which measure there are a lot more (though still relatively few compared with the options in 3e and 4e).

Anyway, sorry about that!

 

[CapnZapp]

Most people didn't like it and it didn't test well. So they scrapped that idea.

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.

 

[delericho]

I'm uncertain about that.
I'm a big fan of the '80s. But I'm also pushing 40. I doubt there are many people 30 years and younger who have much nostalgia for the '80s. And D&D seems to be doing very well with people in their 30s, 20s, and even teens.

Some of the '80s nostalgia is almost more for the pop culture and aesthetic without actually being nostalgic for the '80s.

Okay, I'll agree with that. But I'm not sure it makes any great difference - whether it's 80's nostalgia or an 80's aesthetic (quite possibly driven by nostalgia on the part of the creators), the point remains that the 80's is big in the zeitgeist right now, and D&D is benefiting from that. At some point pop-culture will inevitably move on, which is likely to affect D&D in turn.

Of course, none of that is to criticize 5e or minimize its success. It's a very strong version of the game (and the more I play it the more impressed with it I become). WotC did very well to come to market with the right product at the right time.