WotC Jeremy Crawford Interview: High level play. By Christian Hoffer

[darjr]

I do love running tier 4 games. Wild and energetic and bizarre locales.

Combat is fun too, the players are so very capable I can just put my foot to the foor.

 

[Mort]

I do love running tier 4 games. Wild and energetic and bizarre locales.

Combat is fun too, the players are so very capable I can just put my foot to the foor.

I've found tier 4 games great IF the players are versed with their characters and have some high level play experience.

If the players don't know their characters - high level play can get tedious quick. Plus you have to be very careful what gets thrown at a group that doesn't know its capabilities!

 

[darjr]

I've found tier 4 games great IF the players are versed with their characters and have some high level play experience.

If the players don't know their characters - high level play can get tedious quick. Plus you have to be very careful what gets thrown at a group that doesn't know its capabilities!

Yea. I agree. In fact I can’t think of a time where I have had run a game that high with inexperienced players. Huh?

 

[Mort]

Yea. I agree. In fact I can’t think of a time where I have had run a game that high with inexperienced players. Huh?

My son's group (they were 13 or so at the time) wanted me to run a high level adventure for them.

I gave them high level pregens (let them pick from a bunch) and asked them to be familiar with the characters.

But they weren't and it was TOUGH because not only did I have to remember and keep track of my stuff (hard enough for a tier 4) but help them remember all of their stuff and do A LOT of prompting. It worked, and they all said they had a blast, but keeping that much stuff in my head was exhausting (brought me back to running high level 3e).

 

[OB1]

My son's group (they were 13 or so at the time) wanted me to run a high level adventure for them.

I gave them high level pregens (let them pick from a bunch) and asked them to be familiar with the characters.

But they weren't and it was TOUGH because not only did I have to remember and keep track of my stuff (hard enough for a tier 4) but help them remember all of their stuff and do A LOT of prompting. It worked, and they all said they had a blast, but keeping that much stuff in my head was exhausting (brought me back to running high level 3e).

I bet! You're braver than me, I just refuse to run high level one shots (even with my group of experienced players who've gone to level 20 twice).

 

[Azzy]

I gave up on D&D play past 9th-12th level a long time ago. After perusing the Epic Handbook in 3E, that just confirmed I have no desire to DM the game pretty much past 10th level.

I've DMed for 3.5e and that turned me off to DMing 3.5e. I've also played epic-level characters in 3.5... I never want to do that again.

 

[Vael]

I've DMed for 3.5e and that turned me off to DMing 3.5e. I've also played epic-level characters in 3.5... I never want to do that again.

My first time DMing was 3.5 ... at the time, it convinced me that DMing wasn't for me. Thankfully, 4e and 5e were much easier to DM and I've enjoyed DMing them.

That said, I've yet to play or DM 5e past 10th level ... and I'd like to. Hopefully, we'll get more adventure support for higher levels.

 

[Stormonu]

I've DMed for 3.5e and that turned me off to DMing 3.5e. I've also played epic-level characters in 3.5... I never want to do that again.

Yeah, back in the day I loved 3.5E. Looking back, I'd rather not go back to it or just limit it to E6 (and dunk the 2nd round of Complete books). I've recently been hankering for 2E, but after a game with my wife (who played it back in the day) and my two (now adult) kids baffled and horrified reactions to the rules in the adventure we did play, that doesn't look like it's in the cards. Even back in the day though, DMing the higher levels of 2E was a pain, mostly in the area of prep.

Even OSE, another system I'm fond of that uses B/X as its core, only goes up to 15th level. I actually appreciate that.

I know several friends who love high level play (having multiple characters with levels in the 20's and 30's), but I've always found - regardless of edition - that DMing those levels of play is such a headache - especially as a DM and juggling the knowledge of what players CAN do as well as what the enemies are capable of as well. Even worse is finding (or making!) adventures for those high levels that don't boil down to "strip away the PCs power" and/or fail to account for the arsenal PCs have available to them. Or the adventure just attempts to curtail the PCs to some deathtrap dungeon that the PCs end up having abilities that bypass most of the damn thing.

 

[Azzy]

Yeah, back in the day I loved 3.5E. Looking back, I'd rather not go back to it or just limit it to E6 (and dunk the 2nd round of Complete books). I've recently been hankering for 2E, but after a game with my wife (who played it back in the day) and my two (now adult) kids baffled and horrified reactions to the rules in the adventure we did play, that doesn't look like it's in the cards. Even back in the day though, DMing the higher levels of 2E was a pain, mostly in the area of prep.

Sorry that that's not looking like an option.

Yeah, if I were to play/DM a non-5e edition of D&D, it'd likely be a 1e/2e hybrid like I did as a teenager. Unfortunately, I don't still have all the house rules that we used back then.

 

[MockingBird]

I have yet to DM high level 5e but I want to. Most of our games naturally come to an end in the 10-12 level range. I thought about doing a one shot at higher levels. Probably run the Vecna one shot from Dndbeyond.