High Level Games - Love 'em or hate 'em?

[shadow]

I love them! Why? Not only the power characters get, but also the variety. On low levels the DM only has a very limited selection of monsters to throw at the party. Mainly orcs, goblins, kobolds, and other humanoids. Fighting only orcs and goblins gets boring after a while. On high levels the DM can throw all kinds of monsters at the players: demons, golems, dragons, etc. Hence high level play adds variety to the game that just can't exist on low level.

 

[kreynolds]

Besides, rolling up a character is half the fun of the game

Apparently so. I run 8 games.

 

[Ruvion]

I used to think that high level = more variety, but now, my group feels that once you hit the umpteenth level, every challenge seems to be the same. High level monsters seem to be walking stats, a challenge to overcome, not a threat to your adventuring soul. Not even death have a hold on the party anymore

Any ideas on how to put the p433r and fun back into D&D after 10th level of playing?

 

[kreynolds]

Any ideas on how to put the p433r and fun back into D&D after 10th level of playing?

I have a simple 3 word answer. A good DM.

You can't just rely on combat all the time. You've gotta use more elements of role-play, complex plots, and interweaving story-lines. Also, never forget the importance, and fun, of a 20th level character actually getting the chance to totally kick the crap out of a mere 10th level wizard intent on taking over the world. As players, you are constantly reminded that there are many others out there much more powerful than you. Conversely, when you hit high level, there are gonna be NPCs that need to be taught the same lesson you learned, and who better to teach them than you.

 

[Dimwhit]

I think they can be great. An effective high-level campaign depends greatly on how well the DM controlled the PCs up to that point. Not strict controlling, mind you. But if a DM gives the players too much at lower levels, they become difficult to manage later on. But it's great having characters that can actually obtain the feats they've always wanted and cast those high-level spells.

I also don't think it's tough to challenge high-level PC. But the best way to do it require more work from the DM. Put a group of high-level PCs against a comparable group of evil adventurers and you can easily have an epic battle.

Anyway, I ramble. In short, I like the high-level campaigns.

 

[WizarDru]

My personal experience says that high level is just as fun as mid and low level games, but a different kind of fun.

Characters dream of the day they can wield those powers...it's what they're working towards, after all. Not able to challenge them? Hardly a problem. In fact, quite the opposite. With higher level characters, you can present them with much tougher challenges, knowing they have the resources to find their way out.


Piratecat basically inspired me to try things differently once the players past 11th level...specifically, not worry as much about their capabilities, but instead concentrate more on the challenge itself. A 14th-level mage or cleric has access to some considerable information gathering abilities and esoteric powers....so let THEM figure out a solution...but more importantly: BE FLEXIBLE. 'Lord of the Iron Fortress' shows how to run a high-level dungeon crawl, but doesn't really go as far as it might.

And trust me, as characters get more powerful, they also get more vulnerable in some ways. Sure, the characters can kill the thirty zombies...but can they save the townspeople from the Demi-Lich at the same time, and stop the ultra-foozle from exploding? Sure...but it doesn't have to be easy.

 

[WizarDru]

Unfortunately, that doesn't leave you much "real" experience to draw upon, as the experience is very different when you actually start at 1st level and work your tail off to get to 20th. You miss out on a lot of great gameplay, and especially the all important character development when you just start at mid-level.

This is very true. Especially since characters can be built sub-optimally over time, whereas they'll tend to be more optimized when built from scratch. Real adventurers have to FIND their treasure, not get a check for 60,000 g.p and the keys to the magic store. They die, lose levels, change their minds about their direction, and see new material come out that they only wish had come out three months earlier.

There's a world of difference between working your way up to a level and being created out of whole cloth.

 

[Desdichado]

Wizardru:
This is very true. Especially since characters can be built sub-optimally over time, whereas they'll tend to be more optimized when built from scratch. Real adventurers have to FIND their treasure, not get a check for 60,000 g.p and the keys to the magic store. They die, lose levels, change their minds about their direction, and see new material come out that they only wish had come out three months earlier. There's a world of difference between working your way up to a level and being created out of whole cloth.

I'm not denying that. I've had characters that have had relatively long spans of gaming on them (mostly when I was younger, though.) But I somewhat resent the implication that I just don't know what I'm talking about here (although I'm not insulted: I'm not lighting up the grill just yet, Wizardru and kreynolds! ). My taste very much involves change. I get bored playing the same character over a very long length of time (although you can advance in levels fairly quickly in 3e now, if you play by the book) and I want to do something different. I want to try out entirely new settings and themes. I want to DM again, then I want to play again. I want to try entirely new race/class combinations. Etc. ad infinitum.

I don't just not like high level because I'm too ignorant to know what I'm talking about. I also mentioned, which was ignored completely, that I don't think the system scales well, and I dislike that modifiers are much more important than the actual rolls. I dislike the high magic feel that D&D almost forces you into at high level (unless you want to completely do a ton of work as a DM: and you have enough at high level without having to worry about jigging CRs and the like because you don't want everyone in your party hopped up on spells and carrying fourteen magic items into combat, or relying on ridiculous tactics like fly/invisibility fireball divebombings or something like that.) I dislike the complexity of the game at that level. I dislike the unbalancing of the core classes that occurs that that level. Most of all, I dislike the feel of the game at that level. The feel is different and I don't like it. Just because I usually change campaigns (and characters) often and rarely play first through 20th with one character doesn't mean I'm not astute enough to recognize that.

 

[WizarDru]

[/color] I want to try out entirely new settings and themes. I want to DM again, then I want to play again.

Consider yourself lucky. I rarely get to play. Good thing I really enjoy DMing.

I don't just not like high level because I'm too ignorant to know what I'm talking about. I also mentioned, which was ignored completely, that I don't think the system scales well, and I dislike that modifiers are much more important than the actual rolls.

[snip]

Most of all, I dislike the feel of the game at that level. The feel is different and I don't like it. Just because I usually change campaigns (and characters) often and rarely play first through 20th with one character doesn't mean I'm not astute enough to recognize that.

I wasn't trying to imply that you were ignorant, and I'm sorry if I came across that way. I certainly see your point, and agree that D&D does get very magic intensive at higher levels. There's certainly nothing wrong with disliking the style/feel of the high-level game. My point was simply that it's not fair to judge high-level play solely by creating a high-level character...that D&D works best, IMHO, when you work your way up the ranks, and creating an entire party from scratch gives you significantly different results than adventuring to the same point.

I didn't ignore the issue that you think the D&D scales poorly, I just thought it was apparent I disagreed, and left it at that. That, and I wasn't solely addressing my posts at you, but at several previous posters.

 

[Gez]

I voted "What's a high level game" because it was the closest choice I found to "I'd like to play one once before giving my opinion".

Consider I'm neutral to the idea. I won't hate it, but I can't say if I'll prefer high-level to low- or mid-level.