D&D 5E No One Plays High Level?

[SteveC]

Long post incoming! So I am just going to call shenanigans on the "casters have too many high level slots" argument, since I'm living it right now. In the game I'm playing, after next session, we are going to be hitting level 14, which I would say qualifies as "high level play." Here's what my and my cleric friend's slots will look like at that point:

What you see there is that we each have one level seven slot. One level six slot. And two level five slots. An interesting thing to note is that we received no extra spell slots for reaching that level, something that will also be true when we hit level 16.

Our game sessions typically have 3-4 encounters in a typical adventuring day. With the arcane recovery I can push to having two level six slots in a day (which I typically don't do, using them instead to replenish a ton of lower level spells for my 'bread and butter' adventuring spells: shield, silvery barbs, misty step, and counterspell).

Now let's look at my spell preparations for levels 5-7, where my "high power" options are:

Those are some powerful options, but ... once you look across three or four encounters, you're seeing that those high level slots go fast. And my character can control a couple of encounters really well. Does it make the session trivial or not fun for the other characters? It could, but the other players built their characters to do things that mine really doesn't. And that's do a lot of damage. And make all the skill checks to notice things and disarm dangerous things. And talk to things.

And just looking at those spells doesn't explain where some of those slots are really likely to go. We are in a dungeon (Oblivion from Shackled City) where we have to get through doors that are exceptionally difficult to open without having specific spells at our disposal. The DM is allowing me to use Transmute Rock and then have another characters summons "Kool-Aid man" through the walls, which I am not sure is technically in the spell's ability, but the location we're in is designed with 3.5 in mind, so the DM is letting us work around that to continue the adventure. The cost with that is that my most go-to levels of spells for changing the game are being used to continue the adventure. And that's really what being a high level spell caster is. You can do things that the martial characters can't. And our warlock/bard/paladin can smite things into the ground, so that all works out in the end.

I still see a lot of challenges that high level D&D has in play, the biggest being that at high levels if you aren't built to make a kind of check and need to do it, you're kind of out of luck, but others are there as well. What isn't there is that I just force cage or teleport or wall of force around everything and the DM hates me.

 

[Maxperson]

How can you state theoretical popularity so objectively?

The vast majority of 5e players are casuals who picked it up recently. Casuals aren't going to be getting into wargames and building armies for thousands of dollars.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The vast majority of 5e players are casuals who picked it up recently. Casuals aren't going to be getting into wargames and building armies for thousands of dollars.

Casuals who haven't been exposed to all the things you claim they don't or wouldn't like. Ignorance is an acceptable excuse here.

 

[Oofta]

Mass combat requires thought and research to make logical, fun rules. It can't be just added on, and it can't be assumed it's just a backdrop to PC action. Doing so is why so many attempts have come out half-baked.

I would also say I'm not convinced of your continued argument that anything WotC 5e, or any 5e, doesn't have isn't valuable because you assume not enough people (what does that even mean?) want it. You cannot know that, so it just comes down to you not wanting those things. I don't see that as a sufficient reason to stall design.

They've done UA articles for mass combat and it never led anywhere. Even Dragonlance just says "use another game for mass combat". I think it's fairly logical to assume that if there was enough demand for mass combat they would put more investment into making it work.

Could they make it work? I don't know. Seems like they could get psionics to work but despite multiple attempts we still don't really have a full-blown psionics class or subsystem. Meanwhile I have never met anyone express a desire for mass combat and I don't see it fitting the small teamwork design of D&D.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I actually kinda hate the Bastion system. Too gamist for my sensibilities.

That is fine you are allowed to hate it but this kind of response is a conversation killer. How about some alternative proposal?
Even if the Bastion System is added, how does that effect your game. A) you do not play official D&D anymore and even if you do, simply not use the bastion system. It is bound to be an optional system and I would expect that the vast majority of tables would never use it.

You're assuming the bastion system is the right way to go when tackling this issue. There is no reason to assume that; it's just what WotC proposed.

I assumed no such thing, I just do not believe that any stronghold system requires "control of the base game". It is just some additional rules about the actions that strongholds can permit and the costs of creating and maintaining them. There are a number of "stronghold Rules " on DMSGuild and presumably also on DrivethruRPG but from what I have seen these are building and maintenance costs with very little in game effect.
I also reckon that there is little third-party support because not may third party designers use them or even think about them.
I would imagine that we got the bastion system UA because the designers have been looking at the old AD&D material in relation to the anniversary and some one thought that another look at Name level and Domain management might be of interest.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

They've done UA articles for mass combat and it never led anywhere. Even Dragonlance just says "use another game for mass combat". I think it's fairly logical to assume that if there was enough demand for mass combat they would put more investment into making it work.

Could they make it work? I don't know. Seems like they could get psionics to work but despite multiple attempts we still don't really have a full-blown psionics class or subsystem. Meanwhile I have never met anyone express a desire for mass combat and I don't see it fitting the small teamwork design of D&D.

To be honest, if one wants a lightweight mass combat system I would reccomend Strongholds and Followers by MCDM and if one wants something beefier I would suggest and actual miniatures wargame (Hordes of the Things or something like that)

 

[Maxperson]

Casuals who haven't been exposed to all the things you claim they don't or wouldn't like. Ignorance is an acceptable excuse here.

Whatever you want to believe, WotC isn't in the habit of gambling lots of money on the off chance it will succeed to such a great degree that is still makes less money that is acceptable to Hasbro. There isn't enough money in wargaming unless WotC controls all of it, which they can't do. This isn't RPGs where D&D was already the 800 pound gorilla to begin with.

 

[Autumnal]

Long post incoming! So I am just going to call shenanigans on the "casters have too many high level slots" argument, since I'm living it right now.

Ahh, now this is the good stuff! I can’t be the only one who’d been running on old memories of previous editions’ spell lists with varying degrees of just plain wrongness. Thanks for the current numbers!

 

[Micah Sweet]

They've done UA articles for mass combat and it never led anywhere. Even Dragonlance just says "use another game for mass combat". I think it's fairly logical to assume that if there was enough demand for mass combat they would put more investment into making it work.

Could they make it work? I don't know. Seems like they could get psionics to work but despite multiple attempts we still don't really have a full-blown psionics class or subsystem. Meanwhile I have never met anyone express a desire for mass combat and I don't see it fitting the small teamwork design of D&D.

They could just as easily not be doing it because it's hard and they don't want to invest the time and effort, or because they decided internally what D&D is and it doesn't include mass combat.

 

[Minigiant]

So I am just going to call shenanigans on the "casters have too many high level slots" argument, since I'm living it right now. In the game I'm playing, after next session, we are going

It's not "casters have too many high level slots" it's
"casters have too many total slots"

The problem is that even though the low level slots are no good for damage they're still good for effects so players are still looking at these low-level spells every turn that they have a lot of slots for.

If they're new player they might not realize that the low level spells are not good enough for damage.

If they are experienced player them they will switch their low level spells for effects and utility spells which cause long terms as well.

Every turn my wizard and cleric are looking at their spells looking at the map looking at their spells looking at the sheet looking at the spells look, thinking, double check in their spell, oh it has concentration back to the beginning look at this spells look at the mat looking at the spells looking at the map looking at the spells looking at the map.

And as my wizard player says if I was really in the dungeon my brain and senses will be processing these things faster. "It's not my fault, bro."