Do you stop at a certain level? Sweetspot?

[Sigurd]

I have always found Epic level play kind of pointless.

At some point characters get so powerful that they no longer react to the world but direct it. Directing quickly becomes work for the PCs and the game begins to break down.

Do you have the same feelings and when does this happen for you?

What are the best levels of D&D?
Have they changed with the editions?


Sigurd

 

[Thanee]

Yep, epic levels are not very exciting for some reason.

We just play until we reach a point where the campaign is at an end or where we can end the campaign and then start anew. It's always fun to start in the low levels after having played with the high-level super-characters.

Most like the middle levels (6th - 12th or so), because the characters are capable, but not completely out of bounds yet, so that only world-shaking events can cause them a headache.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Dave Turner]

I see this question arise every month or so around here and it points to a deep problem in D&D. The game is ostensibly designed for 20 levels, but people invariably stop short of that level when playing. There is something deeply wrong with the rules of the game when people stop playing short of the implied end of the power curve.

3e did a great job of getting rid of many relics of the 2e rules system. 4e will need to do the same thing, primarily in the area of spells. The spells that break dungeon-based play need to be pushed much into higher levels so that dungeon-based play remains more viable for longer. Yes, this means that teleport and other spells will need to be pushed to 8th or 9th level.

 

[Crothian]

For me there is no "best levels" the game is interesting at all levels. Fiorst through 30th, we've played it all and as long as the players and DMs are creative and having fun I've never fealt the need to perfer one section over another. I think doing so cheats the other levels. If you really enjoy levels 6-10, then you miss the fun of the low levels and when you pass it you also stop having as much fun. I think it can create a mental blaock in people and cause them to not have as much fun since they've convinced themselves X levels isn't as fun as Y.

 

[Bardsandsages]

I use to feel this way, but the current game I am running, everyone just hit 18th level, and I am still having no trouble challenging them. It takes a lot more planning to do so, but I think the trick is to keep an eye on what the players are doing as they develop. Talk to them outside of the game to see what ideas they have for their character, and plan your storyline accordingly.

And at that level, the focus should start shifting from regular hack-slash-kill to other things. The party is dealing with a lot of political issues now that can't be resolved with a simple "drop a fireball on them and kill them" approach. I totally see this current game running into the epic levels. They have a lot on their plate, after all:

They have to travel through the Underdark and straight through a drow city in order to sneak under Thaymount...

Once at Thaymount they have Szass Tam, the Horned Harbinger, and a 25th level cleric of Myrkul to deal with...

After that, they have to clean up the blood war between demons and devils that has spilled out on the Algorand/Thesk border....

There's a small matter of Krusk they need to resolve....

Manshoon has the Sword of Kas. No good comes of that...

ANd all sorts of other stuff.

It's all about the planning.

 

[DragonLancer]

In prior editions we stopped around 13th level, because after that we felt that the players weilded too much power in the form of items and spells that threats were not threatening enough. The game lost interest.

Under 3rd we have gone to 20th for the past couple campaigns, and we feel happier with it, but theres still a sense that magic becomes game breaking at higher levels. Not everyone is going to agree but hey. Still with 3.5 we are happy to play to 20th.

As for the best level bracket... IMO its 1st-9th.

 

[Aloïsius]

I have never played pas the 13th level... I would want to, however.

I think each level is interesting, but they have different requierement. I like 1st level adventures, I like the "mid low level" (5-7), and the 11-13 bracket is when your character start to be a real power, in most setting.

 

[DarrenGMiller]

The characters in my campaign that is just ending hit 15th level last week. That is about as high as I like to go.

DM

 

[Gothmog]

For the types of games I like to run, I find that D&D breaks down after 12th level. At that point its a superhero game, not a fantasy game.

Sweet spot for me is about 1st-8th levels, both as a player and DM. The highest campaign I've ever run is through 14th under 3E, and I didn't enjoy it after 11th or so. Done one-shots of 18th+, and found it not fun at all. I've played in two campaigns that went to 18+ (one 20th, the other 23rd) and my enjoyment of the game lessened a lot after 12th level.

 

[A'koss]

The game does indeed change significantly as you get into very high and epic levels. I like the idea of epic level play, though after playing a couple of campaigns into 20+ level, IMO it requires too much work (as a DM) for the amount of fun you get out of it. More importantly, it departs from the cinematic sword and sorcery I grew up with so dramatically I find that my distaste for it grows with each passing year.

High level combat in D&D is just not what I envision an "epic fantasy battle" to be. Save or Die magic, high level divinations, teleport, "power up" suites, Intelliget +5 Holy, Disrupting, Icy Burst, Keen, Flaming, Blah, Blah, Blah swords that spit fireballs, heal you twice per day and disintegrate flumphs on contact, magic items by the crate...

As a DM, building & effectively running HL/EL spellcasters and other "stat abominations" just take too long and just feels like work instead of fun.