D&D 5E No One Plays High Level?

[Minigiant]

Why 10? Why not 11 or 9. It seems very arbitrary.

I actually am okay with Int Score slots.

Makes Int useful for all. Fulfills wizard and warlord fantasies.

It seems if you want level 10 characters to be as simple as level 1 characters then you can’t have a system that develops by granting additional abilities. You instead need a system that simply has people get better at doing what they can already do. Problem is, that’s not D&D and it doesn’t sound much fun.

It's fun. May family runs this for Urban Fantasy.

But that's the rub. If traditional slot may be upheld, there is no zero knowledge solution to run high level D&D. High levels would require direct instruction on how to run as both play and run.

If it's got to be like the past, you got to include instructions and advice.

 

[J-H]

In my games it is more common to hear me as the GM say "oh, sh*t, I forgot you [had/could do] that!"


The problem for the GM is that you have complicated character sheets for each PC, plus increasingly complicated enemies and environmental effects. I've read GMs saying that they will run no/low prep games at high levels, but I just don't have the brain for it. At higher levels, I have to spend a lot more time in prep.

As long as you know your player's aren't trying to BS you, why do you have to know everything they can do? I view it as the DM's job to set up interesting or challenging situations. It's the party's job to solve them.
When I'm designing something, unless it looks way, way lethal, I don't have a specific solution in mind. My players can figure it out somehow.

 

[MNblockhead]

As long as you know your player's aren't trying to BS you, why do you have to know everything they can do? I view it as the DM's job to set up interesting or challenging situations. It's the party's job to solve them.
When I'm designing something, unless it looks way, way lethal, I don't have a specific solution in mind. My players can figure it out somehow.

I find it helpful when prepping to look at the PC sheets. It helps me play the intelligent, ancient evil guys better.

While running the game, I only have a quick reference with the PCs passives and ACs. For the bad guys, I'll write up some strategies and how they are likely to react to different situations. I just find it easier to run more interesting dynamic encounters if I've thought through the PCs abilities and how informed, smart, powerful beings would prepare for and react to them.

 

[ECMO3]

I actually am okay with Int Score slots.

That would be far more slots than they currently get at most levels. A 18th level caster currently only has 20 slots.

This is basically a nerf for 19th and 20th level only.

 

[ECMO3]

As long as you know your player's aren't trying to BS you, why do you have to know everything they can do? I view it as the DM's job to set up interesting or challenging situations. It's the party's job to solve them.
When I'm designing something, unless it looks way, way lethal, I don't have a specific solution in mind. My players can figure it out somehow.

I agree. At high level play it is the PCs job to know how their abilities work. You should not be selecting a spell or a subclass without understanding ALL of its abilities.

 

[Minigiant]

That would be far more slots than they currently get at most levels. A 18th level caster currently only has 20 slots.

This is basically a nerf for 19th and 20th level only.

Slot in this system includes Cantrips, Feats, class features, subclass features, extra attunement slots, multiclassing, and racial upgrades.

A 20 Intelligence wizard would spend 1 of their 20 slots to cast spells, another for a spellbook, and 4 more for their 4 Cantrips. Warcaster? That's another spell you can't prepare. Bladesinger? You're down to 10 spells prepared.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Not the OP, but coming from an adult education perspective, the suggested number of things that an adult can remember at one time is 7, + or - 2. It's called Miller's Law.

Basically the number of things an adult can keep in Short Term memory.

Okay, but those things were about working memory. As in, you're having to pick up new things and memorize them on demand, holding all of them purely in your head at the same time, which you weren't familiar with prior to being told. That's the stuff you can only have about 7 of in your head at one time before things start to break down. And, yeah, if you had to memorize even three separate spells and then never look at the written stuff again, that would be a problem!

But when it's stuff you can be familiar with because you've seen it a thousand times, it's not in working memory anymore. It's written down, so the details aren't directly relevant, only the tag is--and that gets lodged in long-term memory, which can hold a hell of a lot more.

Hence why it matters that, for example, two of your powers are At-Wills that essentially never change (other than getting more powerful at Epic.) And that more than half your powers are utilities once you get to high level, because a lot of those are pretty specific. Finally, with many powers being Encounter or Daily, while you might have a dozen at the start of a day or fight, the numbers whittle down over time.

In other words, yeah, there are a fair few here! But it's dicey to say that this is somehow massively overwhelming. It does expect that players will learn and remember their core actions. Every game has expectations of that nature. If a player can't remember their core abilities, they're going to struggle to play any tabletop game with mechanics beyond "ask the GM."

 

[Minigiant]

Not the OP, but coming from an adult education perspective, the suggested number of things that an adult can remember at one time is 7, + or - 2. It's called Miller's Law.

Basically the number of things an adult can keep in Short Term memory.

That's it. I knew I picked 10 from somewhere.

When I though up the slot system, the idea was that you'd have ~7 active abilities and ~3 passives. A player or DM can personally adjust them up or down.

A big dumb barbarian could have 5 passive features buffing their melee and ranged strength attacks, 4 types of SMASH, and a Rage feature.

A holy cleric could have 7 spells and 3 passives for armor, weapons, and flavor their style based of the type of priest they are.

And the wizard could choose 9 spells and some passive for a specialty.

Going up to Intelligence score could pull the average to 9-12 and add more passives. And it lets the people who really want options to go higher. And it lets the people who want to be simple play the "I attack" or "I cast ELDRITCH BLAST AGAIN" 8 Int fighty moron.

 

[Reynard]

I find it helpful when prepping to look at the PC sheets. It helps me play the intelligent, ancient evil guys better.

While running the game, I only have a quick reference with the PCs passives and ACs. For the bad guys, I'll write up some strategies and how they are likely to react to different situations. I just find it easier to run more interesting dynamic encounters if I've thought through the PCs abilities and how informed, smart, powerful beings would prepare for and react to them.

I'm not arguing in either direction because I can see the value in both, but this is basically the tension between a curated experience and a verisimilitudinous one. That is to say, should the BBEG(s) have the best combo of powers and minions to make the Final Battle as awesome for the players as possible, or should the BBEGs have the powers and minions that make the most sense in the fiction? (And of course there I'd a continuum between these poles.)

 

[Quickleaf]

That's it. I knew I picked 10 from somewhere.

When I though up the slot system, the idea was that you'd have ~7 active abilities and ~3 passives. A player or DM can personally adjust them up or down.

A big dumb barbarian could have 5 passive features buffing their melee and ranged strength attacks, 4 types of SMASH, and a Rage feature.

A holy cleric could have 7 spells and 3 passives for armor, weapons, and flavor their style based of the type of priest they are.

And the wizard could choose 9 spells and some passive for a specialty.

Going up to Intelligence score could pull the average to 9-12 and add more passives. And it lets the people who really want options to go higher. And it lets the people who want to be simple play the "I attack" or "I cast ELDRITCH BLAST AGAIN" 8 Int fighty moron.

That seems pretty close to a sweet spot at first glance.

And I love your creative use of Intelligence score providing more ability "slots" - that's inspired!