D&D 5E No One Plays High Level?

[jdrakeh]

I've played in one high level 5e game (my character was an 18th level warlock) and things didn't fall apart or go off the rails. I've also played in high level AD&D games, which seemed fine. I don't have any real experience with 4e. 3x, on the other hand, did seem to completely fall apart at higher levels (especially for me as a DM).

 

[Cordwainer Fish]

Then reach high level and kill that fool until a more affable god of death arrises.

Once you go lich, you'll something that rhymes with 'lich'.

 

[The Soloist]

When I want to play high level we start directly at levels 10-12 and go up from there. Players understand it's not the same type of game.

The other games start at level 3 and usually end at levels 8-10. Player fatigue, DM fatigue or real-life cause the end of campaigns.

My longest-running campaign was during AD&D2e. We played on and off for 5 years and went from level 3 to level 10. An ancient red dragon killed three of the PCs. The other two a thief and a fighter finished the grievously injured dragon, took all the loot and left behind the bodies of their dead comrades to rot. The group disbanded.

 

[Oofta]

It's not about limiting teleportation and plane shifting and whatnot, it's about writing adventures to accommodate them. 3e was pretty good for this, especially the stuff in Dungeon Magazine. But a high level game run by the RAW, that allows all the high level abilities, is hard to run. Some guidance for DMs who haven't gotten experience doing so might help encourage them to try it.


A big part of high level play, in my experience, is gaming out the consequences of pcs' choices from earlier in their careers.

Well, the post I was responding to indicated that teleportation and planeshift were the main issues so I discussed those. One note about planeshift is that it just puts you somewhere in the general area; it's something many DMs likely ignore but could have pretty nasty consequences.

In any case I guess I've never had much of an issue designing high level play. It's really not that much different thematically because there are only so many ways to skin a cat or set up plots. One of my high level campaigns had the group setting up in a city that was caught between two warring factions vying for control, with both of the factions being evil and while not apocalyptic, would have been bad for the region. So at first they were fighting some local ruffians, then hit some enemies that had backing from an outside power and so on. I think of it like a lot of standard TV series from back in the day when they had more than 8 episode per season. There was a main overarching plot and then little side-plots thrown in. Sometimes the plots took them to other planes of existence but it always came back to needing to protect the city they grew up in.

The biggest problem that I see, which they say they are looking to fix with the 2024 edition is coming up with high level opponents that are not the exact same lich or archmage with different name, especially if you don't want to rely on extraplanar threats constantly. I got fairly good at upgrading things, like making the Lord Of Blades a CR 20 bad guy who, along with several allies, had taken over the PCs home town while they were off elsewhere.

 

[Mort]

It's not, but there is also no reason to waste half of the level budget on nothing, when there is only one reason the high levels become impossible. And that's high-level spells. There is nothing game-breaking about a lv16 Barbarian/Fighter/Rogue.

Like, DnD4 went to level 30 without the issues that 3e and 5e have. Clearly the higher levels were meant to work there.

Yes, there are some problematic high level spells. But (and this is where high level play CAN be tough for the DM), with a bit of knowledge and experience they can be dealt with pretty well and intergrated into a fun high level experience.

Like wish, The example the video uses (wishing the big bad had never been released), has built in controls.

For a PC wizard: This wish is WAY outside the parameters of a "normal" wish. As such, assuming it works, the PC wizard is risking (25% chance) of completely losing access to all spells. That's a big decision.

For items (the video mentions players have "several" items that grant wish): Simple. Don't give the party access to items you (as DM) are not prepared for. If you allow the party several wish granting items and then lament their affect on the game? That's on you!

Or the other "big" high level problem - Simulacrum. In a high level game, there are plenty of ways to deal with this. One I've done: Party had a ruler of a kingdom die on them and they REALLY wanted him back. Problem - he was perfectly happy in the afterlife and didn't WANT to come back - so no raising (willing target only). So the party wizard simulacrumed him. Which had some seriously fun game implications PLUS he couldn't cast the spell again without the ruler melting away - was a truly fun "high level" issue. Or there is just banning it - that works too.

One thing I've found that IS a problem in 5e. Casters with too much access to good wands, staffs and other charged items. Because they recharge daily, the casters aren't afraid to use them at need - and that means their own resources can be used for that many more things. It becomes much more difficult to challenge high level casters at that point.

 

[J-H]

The problem with more high level content is one teleport and that content is now useless. The players can just say no and plane shift.

If the players don't want to engage with the campaign's premise, and decide to just Plane Shift off to Sigil or something instead of dealing with the Creeping Doom plague and the undead clerics of Talona behind it, that's an out of character discussion about "Guys, do you really want to play this or not?"
As long as there are stakes, time pressure, etc., the players can't just bamf out for a month.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I generally don't like high-level play. However, I played high level in 2e and in 4e. I didn't like 3e very much after about level 6, and I don't like 5e much after about level 9. It's spellcasting that's at fault. I don't like MAGIC much.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

While watching the DM's Lair video, I had an epiphany: I don't think high-levels are now (or have ever been) intended to be played. It's like buying a Powerball ticket when the prize has reached $500M. It's aspirational. It's the story of the American dream - "if you just work hard enough, you too can become Jeff Bezos."

Realistically, it's never going to happen, but it's an extra power fantasy grafted on to your existing power fantasy of playing D&D.

As usual: Except for 4e. Which had multiple full 1-30 adventure paths (including some very highly regarded ones from ENWorld!), as well as publishing multiple books specifically containing adventure possibilities and hooks for Epic-level characters.

Personally, I don't think it's true that high level isn't intended to be played. Instead, I think it's that the people who make the game keep making the same mistake, over and over, because it doesn't have much negative consequence for them in the short term...and by the time the long term rolls around, they're switching to a new edition or updating the current edition (as we see with 5.5e, regardless of what they choose to call it.)

That mistake is, quite simply, they don't test high level play. Or, at least, they do no more than a worthless token effort and presume that patterns which existed at level 1 will continue to exist at level 15.

Unfortunately, game design is significantly more of an effort than a lot of people realize, and it requires more than just the hope that patterns of player behavior will remain consistent when the numbers informing that behavior change. I wish more designers--professional and amateur alike--understood the critical importance of actually doing real (if basic) statistical analysis of the system. For a game built around a probabilistic, mathematical framework, its creators have a tendency to be unbelievably blithe about how probability actually works and what math can actually tell you about things!

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yes, there are some problematic high level spells. But (and this is where high level play CAN be tough for the DM), with a bit of knowledge and experience they can be dealt with pretty well and intergrated into a fun high level experience.

Like wish, The example the video uses (wishing the big bad had never been released), has built in controls.

For a PC wizard: This wish is WAY outside the parameters of a "normal" wish. As such, assuming it works, the PC wizard is risking (25% chance) of completely losing access to all spells. That's a big decision.

For items (the video mentions players have "several" items that grant wish): Simple. Don't give the party access to items you (as DM) are not prepared for. If you allow the party several wish granting items and then lament their affect on the game? That's on you!

Or the other "big" high level problem - Simulacrum. In a high level game, there are plenty of ways to deal with this. One I've done: Party had a ruler of a kingdom die on them and they REALLY wanted him back. Problem - he was perfectly happy in the afterlife and didn't WANT to come back - so no raising (willing target only). So the party wizard simulacrumed him. Which had some seriously fun game implications PLUS he couldn't cast the spell again without the ruler melting away - was a truly fun "high level" issue. Or there is just banning it - that works too.

One thing I've found that IS a problem in 5e. Casters with too much access to good wands, staffs and other charged items. Because they recharge daily, the casters aren't afraid to use them at need - and that means their own resources can be used for that many more things. It becomes much more difficult to challenge high level casters at that point.

Charged items IMO were better when they had actual limited charges and just stopped working when they ran out. If you really wanted a way to recharge them, make it an expensive, lengthy, and/or hard to research ritual.

In fact, the ritual option would be a great way to deal with high level magic in general, which would also allow you to cap level advancement (insofar as personal power goes) at a lower, somewhat more manageable and relatable level. Continued advancement after that point could move into something like the domain game.

Guys! I've fixed D&D!

 

[Umbran]

But when you put the use of that spell into the DND ecosystem you are using ask yourself, what is the god of death going to do when he/she finds out you are avoiding your fate?

Note that various cultures have different relationships with death, and so not all "gods of death" will have the same take on this. The God of Death doesn't necessarily "own" the dead, and Death may not always be "your fate".

In one game I ran, there was no "god of death" at all. There was a god of the boundary between life and death. There were some prescribed rules to crossing that barrier (which included the usual clerical spells). If you followed the proper protocols (this was a LN god) then you could pass.

Generally, using normal clerical raise/resurrection was following the protocols - and for the soul to make it worthwhile, it usually meant coming back with a Geas/Quest from the god responsible for the raising. So, it payed to pick your cleric wisely. If the only cleric around who can cast Raise Dead is a follower of the Dungbeetle God, well....

Creation of undead was not following protocol, so as far as the King of Stones was concerned, all undead could/should be destroyed on sight, if possible.