[Poll] As A *Player*, Do You Enjoy Low-Magic/Grim&Gritty Campaigns?
- Thread starter FireLance
- Start date
Buttercup
Princess of Florin
Regarding the original question, I didn't vote, because the option I prefer isn't listed. I don't mind lethal games. I don't mind low-magic games. What I have absolutely no interest in is hopeless games. If the BBEG can't ever be defeated, if everything the PCs do eventually turns to dust and ashes, and no force for good can ever triumph, then I'll be moving on to a different campaign.
I enjoy playing spell casters. I also enjoy playing fighters and rogues. So I can easily adapt to any sort of campaign world. Even as a spell caster though, spells like Fly and the various divination spells just seem too much like Diablo II to me. Don't get me wrong, I love computer games. But when I play D&D, I'm looking for a different sort of experience. (This is probably why I don't like resurection spells. Too much like starting over from the last saved game.)
I enjoy playing spell casters. I also enjoy playing fighters and rogues. So I can easily adapt to any sort of campaign world. Even as a spell caster though, spells like Fly and the various divination spells just seem too much like Diablo II to me. Don't get me wrong, I love computer games. But when I play D&D, I'm looking for a different sort of experience. (This is probably why I don't like resurection spells. Too much like starting over from the last saved game.)
Snoweel
First Post
RangerWickett
Legend
As a player, I prefer low-powered games in D&D. This is not because I dislike high-powered games. Rather, I dislike the level of complexity involved in high-level games. I played in an adventure yesterday, which climaxed with a 10-hour fight. I wanted to kill my DM afterward, for taking so bloody long to look up all the dozens of things each NPC could do. Hell, even I was left dredging the bottom of the barrel for my cleric's spells by the end of the fight. "Hmm, I'm 15th level. Do I want to cast command on the 40-HD fire elemental, or perhaps bless?"
In my opinion, high-level characters in D&D are too complicated, and have too many toys. I like sorcerers, because they have spells that don't change, so it's easy to run them. Sorcerers are like superheroes, with clearly-defined powers. Of course, any good superhero system lets the heroes go beyond their limits when it's for dramatic effect, but you don't see superheroes with all of the 20 different powers even just a high-level fighter has available with his magical equipment. Throw in monster-summoning mages that can pick from a huge field of critters, and combats just get too complicated.
If in high-level D&D you didn't have so many options, things would be easier for DMs, and faster for players. When I DM, I list the six or so most common tactics of major bad guys, and don't worry about all the other things they can do unless I feel like winging it. Doing it by the book takes too long.
I really tend to have a lot of fun in games of 3rd to 8th level. With sorcerers, I can enjoy myself even up to 12th level or so before it gets ridiculous.
In my opinion, high-level characters in D&D are too complicated, and have too many toys. I like sorcerers, because they have spells that don't change, so it's easy to run them. Sorcerers are like superheroes, with clearly-defined powers. Of course, any good superhero system lets the heroes go beyond their limits when it's for dramatic effect, but you don't see superheroes with all of the 20 different powers even just a high-level fighter has available with his magical equipment. Throw in monster-summoning mages that can pick from a huge field of critters, and combats just get too complicated.
If in high-level D&D you didn't have so many options, things would be easier for DMs, and faster for players. When I DM, I list the six or so most common tactics of major bad guys, and don't worry about all the other things they can do unless I feel like winging it. Doing it by the book takes too long.
I really tend to have a lot of fun in games of 3rd to 8th level. With sorcerers, I can enjoy myself even up to 12th level or so before it gets ridiculous.
Psion
Adventurer
The way the poll is phrased, I chose "no".
It's not that I want a game in which armies have magic swords and cities have sewer systems run by magic. However, that's not what the poll asked (but some people that answered seem to think it was.) It's the over-reaction in the other direction that I specifically do not want. I've played games in which you have to save up for several adventures to afford a chain shirt or a sword. That is not fun in my book. I prefer my plots to be a little bit loftier; when I am that focussed on fulfilling the basics instead of bigger things, it is not fun for me.
It's not that I want a game in which armies have magic swords and cities have sewer systems run by magic. However, that's not what the poll asked (but some people that answered seem to think it was.) It's the over-reaction in the other direction that I specifically do not want. I've played games in which you have to save up for several adventures to afford a chain shirt or a sword. That is not fun in my book. I prefer my plots to be a little bit loftier; when I am that focussed on fulfilling the basics instead of bigger things, it is not fun for me.
milotha
First Post
To me, it's all relative. The D&D world does scale with PC level.
When PCs are low level, they are confronted by the appropriate CR challenges. When the PCs are high levels they are confronted by CR appropriate challenges. These are different challenges.
Suppose you have a road in your campaign with some monster encounters to add some combat into the game. You want the players to be challenged by say on average 1 encounter as they travel down the road.
The levels of the world slide example:
A 1st level party will encounter some orcs, a 5th level party encounters some trolls, a 10th level party encounters a fire giant, a 15th party encounters a 15th level kobold sorcerer, and a 20th level party encounters a hungry old red dragon.
The levels of the world stay fixed example.
The party encounters some orcs: The first level party is challenged. 5th and up- easy. Would this even be worth mentioning to a 20th level party?
The party encounters an old red dragon: The 1st and 5th level party are toast combat wise. I'm sorry you guys freshly rolled up characters just died, but there was a dragon on this road, and hey you looked like a snack. I'm guessing that most people would call this bad GMing.
Does any GM really design up a single level independent adventure. Is this realistic -no, but neither is ANYTHING really realistic about D&D. That's the fun of it.
When PCs are low level, they are confronted by the appropriate CR challenges. When the PCs are high levels they are confronted by CR appropriate challenges. These are different challenges.
Suppose you have a road in your campaign with some monster encounters to add some combat into the game. You want the players to be challenged by say on average 1 encounter as they travel down the road.
The levels of the world slide example:
A 1st level party will encounter some orcs, a 5th level party encounters some trolls, a 10th level party encounters a fire giant, a 15th party encounters a 15th level kobold sorcerer, and a 20th level party encounters a hungry old red dragon.
The levels of the world stay fixed example.
The party encounters some orcs: The first level party is challenged. 5th and up- easy. Would this even be worth mentioning to a 20th level party?
The party encounters an old red dragon: The 1st and 5th level party are toast combat wise. I'm sorry you guys freshly rolled up characters just died, but there was a dragon on this road, and hey you looked like a snack. I'm guessing that most people would call this bad GMing.
Does any GM really design up a single level independent adventure. Is this realistic -no, but neither is ANYTHING really realistic about D&D. That's the fun of it.
