D&D General Does D&D Really Need 20 Levels?

[abazaba]

I dont know, but its around.

View attachment 448139

Speaking as one who only got into the game through 5e, I think I can now confidently say: brain. hurts. now.

 

[AlViking]

Just because. Some people here are advocating that 'we' should no longer have PC's beyond level 10. So, no longer any monsters beyond level 10 then, either. Just think about all the useless monsters we could cut from the MM then ! And all the pages it would save !

You'd eliminate more if you got rid of all monsters that are lower than CR 1. How many people really use those after PCs are level 2? Just think how much you could save if you just hit the "sweet spot" of PC levels 3-6!

 

[Scribe]

Speaking as one who only got into the game through 5e, I think I can now confidently say: brain. hurts. now.

I dont know, I look at 5e Monster Stat Blocks and wonder why it needs to be (it doesnt) that complicated at all.

 

[bsss]

I dont know, I look at 5e Monster Stat Blocks and wonder why it needs to be (it doesnt) that complicated at all.

I'll probably anger some people by saying this, but the majority of D&D monsters (any edition, any clone/offshoot/etc.) just need some core stats, a vibe, a couple keynote things they do, and a nod that the DM is allowed to do cool stuff because they want to. And if you aren't in an encounter building/tactical combat setting, core stats being "balanced" is only extra credit.

 

[Zardnaar]

That's an irrelevant number. What is relevant is what percentage of those who avoid life's pitfalls and consistently play the game reach level 10+, and that's about 33%, not 10%.

So about 33% of folks who are the ones most likely to continue to buy books play to high levels, with about 10% reaching level 20.

The games that have to stop at level 5 because the DM moved away or stop at level 7 because two players got jobs and can't make it any longer, don't matter when it comes to designing what level the game will go to.

Doesn't really matter why they don't keep playing.

1% (sometimes 3% ) hit epic levels. Thats what beyond data is saying.

 

[Zardnaar]

Well, when I say monster 'levels' I must mean monster 'challenge ratings' that are appropriate for 10th level characters. Still, we need to let all of that unnecessary monster baggage go regardless. I mean, who needs a Tarrasque ?

Big T could be redone at CR20

 

[Maxperson]

Doesn't really matter why they don't keep playing.

1% (sometimes 3% ) hit epic levels. Thats what beyond data is saying.

It 10000000% matters why they don't keep playing. If half your customers are stopping because you don't have elves, you put in elves as that's something that makes a huge difference. If half of them are stopping for various life reasons have absolutely nothing to do with your game, then you do absolutely nothing to change your game as no change is going to make one iota of difference.

When it comes to game rules and what changes to make, you only look at those who are playing consistently and what THEY need or want, and around 1/3 of those people want levels 10+, because they play those levels. 10% play to level 20.

 

[Minigiant]

What?

View attachment 448135

That says Djnni not Wizard.

This...is not how that works. There are monsters above 10, why wouldnt there be?

If they are above leve 10, like in Shadowdark, you cannot meaningfully interact with them without DM fiat.

Thats my point. You either get a shell, a reflavored Brute, or a DM mercy match.

 

[Scribe]

That says Djnni not Wizard.

Holy naughty word. So now it's not good enough that a Monster has it, it has to specifically say Wizard.

This your 4th or 5th shift in the last few days.

If they are above leve 10, like in Shadowdark, you cannot meaningfully interact with them without DM fiat.

This means what?

 

[bsss]

It 10000000% matters why they don't keep playing. If half your customers are stopping because you don't have elves, you put in elves as that's something that makes a huge difference. If half of them are stopping for various life reasons have absolutely nothing to do with your game, then you do absolutely nothing to change your game as no change is going to make one iota of difference.

When it comes to game rules and what changes to make, you only look at those who are playing consistently and what THEY need or want, and around 1/3 of those people want levels 10+, because they play those levels. 10% play to level 20.

Just to add on why it's important to know the why, they probably have (or at least ought to, if they're smart) a ton of analytics on usage situations from DDB. Any 1%, 3%, whatever is a coarse number, but if they have data people worth their salt, they could be looking at return traffic, where people drop off in their site, if players keep restarting low level adventurers or stick with adventurers for many levels, or mysteriously disappear for a year or forever, if they're there to make characters for the hell of it, if more people with or without high level wizards like reading about wish and if that inspires them to make wizards, how often people engage with every individual element. They should have a stupid amount of data (that they would of course not share, it's basically market research) to make their decisions.