D&D 5E Running High Level 5E is more fun than I thought it would be.

[S'mon]

I've run two 5e campaigns at 20th+ and yes it works great. Running Rise of the Runelords currently with level 20+ PCs (they have a bunch of Epic Boons) and it still runs smoothly. Compared to the nightmare of high level 3e or PF, it's fantastic.

 

[OB1]

Love everything about Tier IV in 5e. DMed Tier IV for 15 months after 3 years getting there in a 1-20 homebrew that started in the playtest. Dragged the PCs to Hell (and the Abyss, and Carcerri, and Pandamonium, and Mechanus, and Sigil and... well you get the picture) and back and we all had a blast.

After the PCs ended the major story threat to their world in the next to last session (and escaping certain death on the back of a Unicorn), decided to have a bit of fun in the final one. The Matron Mother of the Drow riding a Terrasque (pulled from a couple of unresolved Tier IV sidequests) crashed the wedding of one of the PCs to an NPC. The Hero's flew off, defeated the pair in four rounds, and were back in time for the PC to finish her vows and enjoy the reception after.

Starting campaign 2 (via Roll 20 due to the stupid &%$# Corona virus) in a month, and already looking forward to the fun that Tier IV will bring in a few years.

 

[cmad1977]

Our finale of Rise of Tiamat was amazing.
They rode to battle in the giant crewed Flying Fortress while the combined forces of the realms engaged the cult armies at the Well of Dragons.

First they fought off a large boarding action. Then supported the Flaming Fist from above before they were overwhelmed.
Then disembarked to face an hated Green Dragon at the gates of the temple. And finally launched a two pronged strike through the front door of the temple and through a whole in the roof upon Severin and the cultists summoning Tiamat.
They did it with 3 turns left in the ritual. Twinned Haste made a HUGE difference in the fight given the scale of the Temple of Tiamat.

Which is to say: high level play is great in 5e.

 

[ClaytonCross]

Levelling goes fast (particularly after the 6-11 sweet spot). 15-20 go past really quick.

I'd totally recommend doing it. So many DMs rage quit at mid levels and consequence have no experience dealing with high level shenanigans. Accordingly when their next campaign hits mid level and someone pulls a high level shenanigan... they rage quit again.

You've gotta run a few at high level to get used to it.

It's truly epic. IME players love getting a character to high levels, and playing them as epic heroes.

Yep, I have never had a GM who was willing to get used to it. So about level 9 - 10 the quite the campaign and reset. I want to play high level characters and the other players I have been at the table with want to play high level characters. It is 100% the GMs who prevent high level play in my experience. I suspect all the D&D Beyond metric saying people only play 1-10 are a reflection of this being very common. There are always exceptions but I personally have never heard a player say "I am level 10, I don't want to play any more unless we reset to 1" While every single GM I have played under said roughly, "We hit level 10, we might do 1 or 2 more levels to wrap up the story but intend to reset, you should start thinking about what character you want in the new campaign."

 

[Ogre Mage]

I think there is definitely a certain amount of truth in that. My preference as both a player and DM is lower-key games as I mentioned earlier. I suppose for myself it goes from the level of fun-fantasy (say tier 2 and tier 3) to simply ludicrous superheroic stuff (tier 4 and epic). I've run and played in epic level stuff, but at this point in my life it just seems meh.

The issue is more:

If it is mostly DM-influenced, why is that? and what about it bothers DMs?

Others have mentioned the headaches which come with balancing encounters for high level PCs. Given the amount of prep time DMing takes even for lower level games, many just don't want to bother. There is generally less campaign support (modules, etc.) geared toward high-level campaigns. Like Flamestrike said, some DMs have control issues and "rage quit" dealing with the powers of high level PCs.

If the campaign has reached Tier 4 then presumably it has been playing for quite some time. So there may be ennui which has set in for DMs. They are burned out managing a long-running campaign and now the PCs have reached a point where they can do crazy superheroic things.

 

[Flamestrike]

Yep, I have never had a GM who was willing to get used to it. So about level 9 - 10 the quite the campaign and reset.

They then have no experience at high levels. So it just becomes a giant cycle.

My advice is always 'leave them to it, and keep going'. You'll have a few adventures smashed in ways you didnt expect as new powers come online that you had not foreseen (due to lack of experience dealing with as a DM).

The only way to get that experience is to persevere. After a few campaigns through (and past) 20th level, you get a handle on the sorts of things high level PCs can do (simulacrums, etherealness, clone etc) and can plan for them accordingly.

 

[Fanaelialae]

They then have no experience at high levels. So it just becomes a giant cycle.

My advice is always 'leave them to it, and keep going'. You'll have a few adventures smashed in ways you didnt expect as new powers come online that you had not foreseen (due to lack of experience dealing with as a DM).

The only way to get that experience is to persevere. After a few campaigns through (and past) 20th level, you get a handle on the sorts of things high level PCs can do (simulacrums, etherealness, clone etc) and can plan for them accordingly.

Another thing high level play can teach you (although you can certainly learn it from low level play as well) is not to be so controlling with the game.

The players whipped out some unanticipated ability and wrecked your plan. So what? Let the players enjoy the win. You have infinite multitudes to challenge them with.

Too many DMs get uptight about ensuring that every single encounter is a challenge. Don't mistake me, challenge is good. The game would be boring without challenge.

However, not every encounter needs to be shoehorned into being challenging. While it can certainly happen at low levels, at high levels it's virtually guaranteed to happen. If high level PCs decide to nova their resources, they can trivialize all but the very hardest encounters. I don't think you can run high level D&D for extended period of time and not learn that it's okay to let the players sneak an easy win here and there. If every encounter becomes something like scry-teleport-kill then you've probably got a problem that needs to be addressed. Otherwise, it's probably not an issue.

 

[DND_Reborn]

See, when I run high-level and epic games, 90% of the encounters are not challenging. Why? Because that isn't how the "world" works. It is one of the things that bugs the heck out of me in a lot of games:

Tier 1 = the world is full of goblins and orcs and ogres, skeletons and zombies, etc.
Tier 2 = now bring on some giants, vampires, and maybe a dragon or two
Tier 3 = the world is now full of greater demons and devils, beholders and liches are everywhere!
Tier 4 = where the heck did all of these ancient dragons, devil lords, and the frickin' Tarrasque come from!? Boy, I am glad we just happened to never run into this stuff in Tier 1!

You get the idea right? I prefer to think of monsters by rarity, not power! My random encounters go by rarity. Yeah, you can be level 1 and encounter something WAY beyond your party. RUN!!! I never design my adventures for the PC's to win, I do it for the players to experience and enjoy!

Thankfully, most really powerful creatures tend to be very rare. But why is it, suddenly, lesser and weaker creatures seem to disappear just because the PCs are more powerful? Sure, I understand the idea that "such easy encounters aren't worth wasting game time on" and so many higher-level adventures gloss over the "obvious wins". But it is great when those other 10% of the encounters take place, and suddenly the players realize this one is gonna make 'em sweat! Also, you'd be surprised how interesting some weaker encounters can turn out when the default strategy to simply kill the opponents is no longer the default--maybe they can actually try something else instead.

 

[toucanbuzz]

Skimming through this thread makes me wonder if the common unpopularity of high level play is mostly a DM phenomena....

Two ideas here from a DM of 20+ years with a comparison to AD&D.

First, high level play is rare, assuming you work your way up. In countless campaigns from AD&D, 3rd, Pathfinder, and 5E, I've only had 3 make it to 18+. There's attrition, real life disruptions, people getting married, having kids, and fatigue even with the best you've got. It's not that I don't want to.

Second, 5E high level characters are insane (IF they get magic items, which unless you're a jerk you're handing out). In Out of the Abyss, I ran it to 14th level. As written, the party would've mopped the floor with Demogorgon, even full power. That's not right. So, I simply buffed demon lords to what they should be (e.g. max hit points, spell-like powers they used to have before switching editions, immunity non-magical attacks, resistance to any weapon less than +3 or another demon lord). I think we suffer from a lack of well-written high level material to give us some guidance, from play-tested material, as to what offers a challenge in this edition. Consequently, some DMs may be frustrated when PCs mow through what was promised as a challenging foe.

I had 2 AD&D groups make it 1st to 20th level (probably took 2 years apiece). AD&D was by no means perfect, but it had a plus in that it capped players by around level 9 as to hit points and abilities (we're going to ignore the wizard, which became a god). This concept of capping characters was popular enough to spawn a 3rd edition project called "Epic 6," which stopped the linear advancement at 6th level but had characters get more Feats and such after that. (See also the fun "Gandalf was only a 5th level magic user" article from 1977). So, there's a notion that capped play, whether it be all abilities or even hit points, helps with longevity of games. Dunno, maybe I just gave out too much XP in AD&D...

 

[Mercurius]

Second, 5E high level characters are insane (IF they get magic items, which unless you're a jerk you're handing out).

Yes, compared to AD&D. But not compared to 3E and 4E.