Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How viable is 5E to play at high levels?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="happyhermit" data-source="post: 7208127" data-attributes="member: 6834463"><p>There are a few aspects to the problem of "encounter design" formulae that get exacerbated at higher level simply due to the nature of a game like D&D and can only be resolved by adding a host of restrictions on playstyles or by the GM adjusting the difficulty for their party. At high levels there is going to be a greater gap between; optimized and optimized parties, number and power of magic items, etc. Then we have playstyle differences which are probably the biggest factor really. </p><p></p><p>Capn Zapp has said that they GM for players that put a lot of effort into tactics, but that as the GM they don't want to do that at all. Strategy, tactics, and other playstyle differences will have a HUGE effect on the difficulty of any particular encounter, and this can become even more evident at higher levels as both sides have more resources, stats, and tools to choose from. I am sure everyone who has played for awhile is well aware that player strategy can make encounters that are impossible as "charge in and fight" scenarios can be overcome with creativity, obviously the same goes for NPCs. So an encounter formula that might work for the most basic NPC tactics/strategy and the most basic PC tactics/strategy is going to be off whenever one of those varies, this isn't really much of an issue most of the time, it's easy for the GM to just sliding scale things but at the extremes it can cause issues. Obviously we understand that necessarily if the NPCs have an incredibly strong strategy (Tucker's Kobolds or something less funny) then encounter formulae become nearly meaningless, but it is almost as bad on the other side, if the NPCs have an incredibly weak strategy. </p><p></p><p>So, I feel like I'm repeating myself but the point is (using default numbers) </p><p></p><p>"Basic NPC tactics/strategy" + "Basic PC tactics/strategy" = OK, but slightly in favour of PCs at high levels if they have any magic items, etc. </p><p>"Basic NPC tactics/strategy" + "Reasonably thought out PC tactics/strategy" = cakewalk, in many situations.</p><p>"Reasonably thought out NPC tactics/strategy" + "Reasonably thought out PC tactics/strategy" + adjustment for individual party strength = All good.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="happyhermit, post: 7208127, member: 6834463"] There are a few aspects to the problem of "encounter design" formulae that get exacerbated at higher level simply due to the nature of a game like D&D and can only be resolved by adding a host of restrictions on playstyles or by the GM adjusting the difficulty for their party. At high levels there is going to be a greater gap between; optimized and optimized parties, number and power of magic items, etc. Then we have playstyle differences which are probably the biggest factor really. Capn Zapp has said that they GM for players that put a lot of effort into tactics, but that as the GM they don't want to do that at all. Strategy, tactics, and other playstyle differences will have a HUGE effect on the difficulty of any particular encounter, and this can become even more evident at higher levels as both sides have more resources, stats, and tools to choose from. I am sure everyone who has played for awhile is well aware that player strategy can make encounters that are impossible as "charge in and fight" scenarios can be overcome with creativity, obviously the same goes for NPCs. So an encounter formula that might work for the most basic NPC tactics/strategy and the most basic PC tactics/strategy is going to be off whenever one of those varies, this isn't really much of an issue most of the time, it's easy for the GM to just sliding scale things but at the extremes it can cause issues. Obviously we understand that necessarily if the NPCs have an incredibly strong strategy (Tucker's Kobolds or something less funny) then encounter formulae become nearly meaningless, but it is almost as bad on the other side, if the NPCs have an incredibly weak strategy. So, I feel like I'm repeating myself but the point is (using default numbers) "Basic NPC tactics/strategy" + "Basic PC tactics/strategy" = OK, but slightly in favour of PCs at high levels if they have any magic items, etc. "Basic NPC tactics/strategy" + "Reasonably thought out PC tactics/strategy" = cakewalk, in many situations. "Reasonably thought out NPC tactics/strategy" + "Reasonably thought out PC tactics/strategy" + adjustment for individual party strength = All good. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How viable is 5E to play at high levels?
Top