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="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7217884" data-attributes="member: 996"><p>It gets bandied about in different ways (including some that are essentially 'straw men'), but that doesn't make all of those ways meaningless, it's just a little confused - and, of course, some people are against it. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> </p><p>I did see a definition of balance (I don't think it was in reference to RPGs) that I liked & remembered: </p><p>A game is better-balanced the more choices it presents to the player that are both meaningful and viable.</p><p></p><p>It's a higher bar than it may seem. </p><p></p><p>Take the common thought-experiment of the 'perfectly balanced game,' with no options (coin-flip dungeon) or no difference among options (rock/paper/scissors). Not balanced at all under that definition. </p><p></p><p>Or consider the classic-D&D balance-of-imbalances-over-levels scheme: your magic-user is wildly overpowered at 18th, but that's 'balanced' by him dying at 1st level, because he only had 1 hp, and was attacked by a house-cat? What if he's rolled a high con & good hps, and was not killed by a house cat? What if the campaign peters out at 7th? What if you roll a low DEX and can /only/ build a Cleric? Does that balance your arch-mage because you didn't get to play him? Do the times you play a fighter because you didn't get a 17 CHA 'balance' the time you play a Paladin? </p><p></p><p> I'm not sure I believe that there is a tension between balance-oriented and feel-oriented players. They both really want the same things, they want a game where they can play the character they want, and have the experience they expect, and generally enjoy the game - and don't begrudge others the same. No matter how 'feelie' you may be, you /probably/ don't want the 'feel' of dominating play and keeping anyone else from having any fun all campaign long, for instance. </p><p></p><p> Nod. In my case it's 1e. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> I ran a 10-year AD&D campaign, spanning 1e & 2e, and I ran so much of it in an improvisational style, exactly like I enjoy running 5e, today. </p><p><em>Especially as the campaign reached higher levels.</em></p><p></p><p> Just because I see 5e and 5e DMing, in particular, as 'more art than science' doesn't mean I think the two are mutually exclusive. You can have great art that's amazingly technically precise, bordering on 'perfection,' (the Mona Liza, Mozart symphonies) and you can have great art that adheres to no technical standards whatsoever (ee comings, Jackson Pollok). You might get a little more push-back on the latter, I suppose, but that's art for you. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></p><p></p><p>After staggering around the map for 40 years, D&D realized it /couldn't/ afford to get it's act together, and had to be true to all the extremes it'd blundered into over the decades. 5e is the result. It's technically...</p><p> ...well, it has artistic merit. </p><p></p><p> Yes, and it's legitimately part of the classic feel, which 5e, equally legitimately, has striven, successfully to evoke. Doesn't mean you can't patch it up, though. If you patched it up in the past, and patch it up similarly now, that's not just classic feel, that's classic feel /specific to your experience/. Now that's nostalgia!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7217884, member: 996"] It gets bandied about in different ways (including some that are essentially 'straw men'), but that doesn't make all of those ways meaningless, it's just a little confused - and, of course, some people are against it. ;) I did see a definition of balance (I don't think it was in reference to RPGs) that I liked & remembered: A game is better-balanced the more choices it presents to the player that are both meaningful and viable. It's a higher bar than it may seem. Take the common thought-experiment of the 'perfectly balanced game,' with no options (coin-flip dungeon) or no difference among options (rock/paper/scissors). Not balanced at all under that definition. Or consider the classic-D&D balance-of-imbalances-over-levels scheme: your magic-user is wildly overpowered at 18th, but that's 'balanced' by him dying at 1st level, because he only had 1 hp, and was attacked by a house-cat? What if he's rolled a high con & good hps, and was not killed by a house cat? What if the campaign peters out at 7th? What if you roll a low DEX and can /only/ build a Cleric? Does that balance your arch-mage because you didn't get to play him? Do the times you play a fighter because you didn't get a 17 CHA 'balance' the time you play a Paladin? I'm not sure I believe that there is a tension between balance-oriented and feel-oriented players. They both really want the same things, they want a game where they can play the character they want, and have the experience they expect, and generally enjoy the game - and don't begrudge others the same. No matter how 'feelie' you may be, you /probably/ don't want the 'feel' of dominating play and keeping anyone else from having any fun all campaign long, for instance. Nod. In my case it's 1e. :) I ran a 10-year AD&D campaign, spanning 1e & 2e, and I ran so much of it in an improvisational style, exactly like I enjoy running 5e, today. [i]Especially as the campaign reached higher levels.[/i] Just because I see 5e and 5e DMing, in particular, as 'more art than science' doesn't mean I think the two are mutually exclusive. You can have great art that's amazingly technically precise, bordering on 'perfection,' (the Mona Liza, Mozart symphonies) and you can have great art that adheres to no technical standards whatsoever (ee comings, Jackson Pollok). You might get a little more push-back on the latter, I suppose, but that's art for you. ;) After staggering around the map for 40 years, D&D realized it /couldn't/ afford to get it's act together, and had to be true to all the extremes it'd blundered into over the decades. 5e is the result. It's technically... ...well, it has artistic merit. Yes, and it's legitimately part of the classic feel, which 5e, equally legitimately, has striven, successfully to evoke. Doesn't mean you can't patch it up, though. If you patched it up in the past, and patch it up similarly now, that's not just classic feel, that's classic feel /specific to your experience/. Now that's nostalgia! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How viable is 5E to play at high levels?
Top