D&D 5E Nobody Is Playing High Level Characters

According to stats from D&D Beyond, above 5th level characters start to drop off sharply, and above 10th level, the figures are very low. The exception is level 20, which looks like it's probably people creating experimental 20th-level builds.

Some of them say 0%; this isn't strictly accurate, but levels 16-19 are used by an insignificant number of players. Interestingly, there are more 3rd-5th level characters than there are 1st-2nd level.

D&D Beyond has said before that under 10% of games make it past 10th level, but these figures show the break point as being bit lower than that. DDB used over 30 million characters to compile these stats.

 

[Nikosandros]

That's the DMG. Not the PHB. As I mentioned (I thought I mentioned), when the PHB came out, fighters didn't even know they were significantly better at combat progression than other classes.

Yes, you mentioned it. However, the DMG is an integral and essential part of AD&D. It is difficult indeed to play the game without combat rules.

 

[Stacie GmrGrl]

You have choices in every edition. It’s just how many. I don’t need alot of mechanical choices. I want RP choices. Do I choose to slay the dragon? Do i try to make an ally of a local warlord? Those are the important choices to me. Mechanics can get in the way of that. It can pigeonhole characters.

Role playing is why we play the games, am I right? Why else do we play rpgs...?

Every rpg designed is designed to help facilitate a means of helping us players roleplay as part of a group, to have an experience, and different rpgs do do this in different ways.

The last thing I want to experience when I play these games is feeling like I have no say as to how my character grows. Character growth in rpgs comes from 2 things... Game design system choices and table roleplaying social choices.

The first is purely based on what the system offers as choices. The second is inherently based on what the GM is ultimately willing to allow happen and how flexible the GM is in giving players freedom to act and RP their characters. The more a game is based on the paradigm of "Rulings, not Rules" the more the responsibility falls onto the GM to manage and arbitrate and choose for the players what the players can do. How well is the illusion of player freedom of agency on the Role playing side of things can the GM pull off is the primary task of the GM. The more they give players the freedom, the more the players feel is in their hands. But this is 100% in the hands of the GM to help facilitate.

To me, how this relates to the topic at hand... Who wants to play to higher levels when every person of that class gets the same core choices made for them? Baring the 3 or 4 things you get from your subclass... Every person of every class is identical on a game mechanic level. That's pigenholing players IMO.

Then if we look at all of WotC's adventures, not all of them go to higher levels.

And then there is the thing about making characters. All the good choices of this game come in the first few levels. Making characters in 5e is a lot of fun. The game does a good job presenting a lot of options. It's a joy to flip through these books and see all that you can be.

WotC did a fantastic job with presentation in this edition. I can flip through these books and get super excited about a lot of different kind of characters. This is partly because there are a lot of various options available when making characters.

A lot of choice and freedom is given to us when making characters.

I've probably made over 20 characters for 5e because it's that fun.

I've never played past 5th level because I also realize that every single thing I want to do for my character at that point is up to the GM to allow me to do it or not.

And I guess I've had just enough bad experiences with it with GMs who were a bit too railroady and punished me for wanting to do what I wanted my character to do instead of following their plots.

 

[jmucchiello]

Yes, you mentioned it. However, the DMG is an integral and essential part of AD&D. It is difficult indeed to play the game without combat rules.

Do you know how many rules are in the 1e DMG that most people did not use?
Weapons vs armor
The initiative rules (as written)
surprise (as written)
various changes to spells
etc.

In my experience, people learned how to DM from other DMs and no one actually read the DMG. Those who did didn't always remember the rules.

Regardless, this subthread is about needing mechanical choices at level up. D&D only started doing that kind of thing in 3.0.

 

[Stacie GmrGrl]

Gosh, so many reasons. Lots of TED talks on the subject, but it boils down to: deciding can be hard, and if the official book says X, then that's one less decision to worry about. When one makes a decision, one has to own it, and people of don't like that level of responsibility.

From the WotC side, keeping decision-making to a minimum helps keep the casual crowd, which is the market they are going after.

That makes sense from a psychological perspective. I can see that.

 

[Anoth]

Role playing is why we play the games, am I right? Why else do we play rpgs...?

Every rpg designed is designed to help facilitate a means of helping us players roleplay as part of a group, to have an experience, and different rpgs do do this in different ways.

The last thing I want to experience when I play these games is feeling like I have no say as to how my character grows. Character growth in rpgs comes from 2 things... Game design system choices and table roleplaying social choices.

The first is purely based on what the system offers as choices. The second is inherently based on what the GM is ultimately willing to allow happen and how flexible the GM is in giving players freedom to act and RP their characters. The more a game is based on the paradigm of "Rulings, not Rules" the more the responsibility falls onto the GM to manage and arbitrate and choose for the players what the players can do. How well is the illusion of player freedom of agency on the Role playing side of things can the GM pull off is the primary task of the GM. The more they give players the freedom, the more the players feel is in their hands. But this is 100% in the hands of the GM to help facilitate.

To me, how this relates to the topic at hand... Who wants to play to higher levels when every person of that class gets the same core choices made for them? Baring the 3 or 4 things you get from your subclass... Every person of every class is identical on a game mechanic level. That's pigenholing players IMO.

Then if we look at all of WotC's adventures, not all of them go to higher levels.

And then there is the thing about making characters. All the good choices of this game come in the first few levels. Making characters in 5e is a lot of fun. The game does a good job presenting a lot of options. It's a joy to flip through these books and see all that you can be.

WotC did a fantastic job with presentation in this edition. I can flip through these books and get super excited about a lot of different kind of characters. This is partly because there are a lot of various options available when making characters.

A lot of choice and freedom is given to us when making characters.

I've probably made over 20 characters for 5e because it's that fun.

I've never played past 5th level because I also realize that every single thing I want to do for my character at that point is up to the GM to allow me to do it or not.

And I guess I've had just enough bad experiences with it with GMs who were a bit too railroady and punished me for wanting to do what I wanted my character to do instead of following their plots.

i don’t disagree with that really. It’s just how much a person needs varies from person to person. If I want all our freedom go for gurps or mutants and masterminds. And mechanics has zero to do with character growth or character concept.

 

[Azzy]

I would post a picture of the page on D3 vault of the drow published in 1978 if I knew it was allowed. I have the module in front of me right now. She was a Demon.

As Tony pointed out to me, in a previous post, that the original module didn't have the lesser goddes tag. I guess that got added when she was reprinted in the Fiend Folio.

 

[Maxperson]

I would post a picture of the page on D3 vault of the drow published in 1978 if I knew it was allowed. I have the module in front of me right now. She was a Demon.

She is a lesser goddess and demon lord according to D3. This is from the end of Lolth's section.

"As a lesser goddess, Lolth has certain attributes common to all divine beings. The DM may choose not to use these in this module, since a properly-played Lolth will easily destroy most Invaders. However, should these abilities be desired or needed for confrontations with a high-level party, the DM may include them in Lolth's abilities. Note that if these optional abilities are used, changes in Lolth's spell selection should be made."

 

[Anoth]

As Tony pointed out to me, in a previous post, that the original module didn't have the lesser goddes tag. I guess that got added when she was reprinted in the Fiend Folio.

Yup. But i don’t think in 1978 they had a detailed idea completely worked out on powerful demons and gods with respect to power. She was a fallen god cast out. Pretty much a demon. But things changed. But it’s all cool. Let her climb her way back up. But I like the idea of demon princes or abyssal lords being on par with gods. And gods not being quite as powerful.

 

[Maxperson]

Yup. But i don’t think in 1978 they had a detailed idea completely worked out on powerful demons and gods with respect to power. She was a fallen god cast out. Pretty much a demon. But things changed. But it’s all cool. Let her climb her way back up. But I like the idea of demon princes or abyssal lords being on par with gods. And gods not being quite as powerful.

No. In the original module she is a lesser goddess. It's in her description towards the end.

 

[Lanefan]

No. People can always attempt what they want with their characters. If one chooses feats that hyper specialize instead of more broad bonuses, presumably that's the character they want.

The issue here is that one relatively-recent D&D edition very much rewarded hyper-specialization, that being 3e (and 3.5, and PF), and many players still have this in the back of their minds.