I refuse to DM 3/3.5 past 7th level. How about you?

[Imret]

No option for "Anything but Epic", so sadly no vote.

I rather like all the levels of play, but 5-15th is certainly my favorite range. By 5th level characters are truly "coming into their own", in my opinion, and start to really shine in their element. By 15th level they begin attracting a lot of attention, both benign and malevolent. If the PC's think that vampire assassin is tenacious, wait until they meet the two nice gentlemen from the New Crosford Public Works Office; they would like to show you some plans for a new public square, and would you happen to have twenty thousand gold coins to benefit the city that raised you?

Most PC's at this level, at least with my group, get into a fight that nearly kills them for the above-mentioned "initiative result decides the outcome" reason, then decide to cut their losses and retire. But maybe that's just us.

 

[Edgewood]

My group is in the 13-14th level range (and closing in on 15th very soon) and we're having a blast!! I have asked my players if they would prefer to retire their characters at 20th level (if they make it that is) or cross over into epic. Right now they're undecided as they are so involved with their characters that they just want to hang on.

We have never had any problems with the levels so far and I'm looking forward to 15th to 20th.

 

[Mystery Man]

My group is level 17 and going strong, plan on stopping...whenever. Maybe level 25? I'm having no problems thinking of things for them to do, and no huge issues. Except for the occasional rule lookup or two.

 

[dougmander]

My campaigns have tended to stall out at around 15th level. The only exception was a one DM, one player campaign with a single PC and her NPC companion that made it to 22nd level. The small party size made things much more manageable.

 

[IronWolf]

I'd run a game at any level. While I may be better at some of the lower to mid-levels than the high levels it only takes a little practice to get better and to get that I need to run some high-level games. It feels like short changing the players to stop games at the mid-levels...

 

[Dinkeldog]

I've run at least one campaign from 1-20 with few problems. The biggest issue that I had was taking care of certain problems that are inherent in high-level spell casting, like the scry-teleport problem.

One comment from below, though...

No one would argue that 3rd edition is a far higher-powered game than 1e/2e. I think this is pretty much an accepted fact; I'm sure I don't have to trot out a bunch of statistics from the AD&D 1e/2e books to make the case. In addition to being higher-powered, 3rd edition also levels players much faster. In the old days it was pretty standard to have high-level PCs with XP in the six-figure range.

I don't think that 3rd edition necessarily leveled characters more quickly than earlier versions. For one thing, in 1e characters got experience for each gold point of treasure that they got. So if they got even one magic item worth 10,000 gp, then each party member would get 10,000/m experience points as a premium on top of everything else, where m is the number of people in the party. Start applying that and the levels could come pretty quickly. Just raid a dragon hoard or two.

 

[Sleepy Voiced]

I chose "not after 15th level", but that mostly has to do with my group. It is the only group I have played 3e or 3.5e with, so I assume there are people who I could DM a higher level game for more comfortably. My main problem has been that most of my players prefer higher level games, but don't know the rules well enough to effectively play their characters. A lot of time is spent as they try to figure out what their abilities really are. More often than not, they end up on the run from encounters 2-4 CR lower than their party level, as they cannot effectively bring their abilities to bear.
Lower levels are loads of fun with this group, but they prefer feeling like their characters have greater powers, even though they don't know how to use them properly.

 

[Drowbane]

Bleh, I normally start my games around lvl 3 - 6. Everything before that is "backstory". I have no problem running the higher levels.

No one would argue that 3rd edition is a far higher-powered game than 1e/2e. I think this is pretty much an accepted fact; I'm sure I don't have to trot out a bunch of statistics from the AD&D 1e/2e books to make the case. In addition to being higher-powered, 3rd edition also levels players much faster. In the old days it was pretty standard to have high-level PCs with XP in the six-figure range.

You appearently didn't play the same 2e that I did... nothing like 3rd lvl characters with Disintegrate (2e Psionics) or 5th lvl characters with 8/1 attack rates (mwahahahha)

 

[TheAuldGrump]

3.X is the first edition of D&D/AD&D that I have actually enjoyed running a game past level 10. For AD&D the balance issues kept getting bigger every level past that point, as fighters became less useful and wizards began ruling the table. The game climax took place at level 18-19 so I voted 'Any'.

But I won't touch Epic.

The Auld Grump

 

[Pseudonym]

I'll run at any level. It hasn't been a problem for me from a DM's perspective. Keeping players together long enough to run a long term game is another issue unrelated to campaign level.

I just want to vote in polls!