D&D 5E Survey Results - Tier 1-4 experience

[discosoc]

Last month I ran a survey asking 5 questions, 4 of which were related to the "tiers of play" mentioned in 5th edition. Logged in and there haven't been many more responses recently, so thought I'd share them with you guys in case anyone was curious.

 

[Hjorimir]

Great stuff. Thanks for sharing!

 

[ccs]

Aside from that last question, these answers haven't changed in nearly 40 years.

 

[discosoc]

Aside from that last question, these answers haven't changed in nearly 40 years.

I'd say they have, considering editions before 3rd never really had an expectation of taking campaigns past level 10 or 12 or so. There were exception, of course.

Anyway, there are also some interesting bits within the data. For example, among those that are players but don't really GM, Tier 1 is twice as popular as with everyone else (14% enjoy it the most rather than 6%). And among that same group, there's a 4% higher preference for T2, 14% higher preference for T3, and an 18% *lower* preference for T4.

I say that's interesting because it seems to show that although there's a bit of an unmet demand for T4 games, the demand is mostly among GM's rather than players. The players want more T2 and T3 games.

Also, people who exclusively GM enjoy T2 more than those who play or play and GM by nearly 27% more. The question asking which tiers are the most difficult are also very different among people who exclusively GM. 50% of those find T1 the hardest to run (compared to 23% for all data). To me, that seems to indicate there's a lack of good training for new GM's; maybe it's just that the published adventures often gloss over what makes their T1 stuff balanced and work, or maybe there's a real lack of compelling challenges to throw at the party for those levels (or maybe something else entirely). Still, it's a bit of data that shows there's a lot of work to be done on Wizards' end to avoid cutting potential GM careers short by virtue of a large hurdle right out of the gate.

Anyway, just letting you know that although the survey does kind of confirm common assumptions, the details are important (to me anyway).

 

[Sacrosanct]

I'd say they have, considering editions before 3rd never really had an expectation of taking campaigns past level 10 or 12 or so. There were exception, of course..

A couple of observations. If even right now, currently, only 2.5% or so play tier 4, then I'd qualify that as an exception as well. Also, the level scale isn't like for like. I.e., a 9th level PC in AD&D was name level, and that's when you started getting into things you don't get into now until the teens. So tier 4 in AD&D starts at level 9. If you consider that, then most certainly it was played. Heck, even if you don't, it seems right to me that 2.5% of AD&D players played at levels higher than 11. Some of the most iconic modules were higher than that (GDQ series, and many had a range that high like Expedition to Barrier Peaks, etc).

I know it's only anecdotal, but I started playing in 1981 and those results seem pretty consistent from what I remember from the day I started.

 

[Horwath]

It's an expected result.

All classes get nice features at lvl 6-7 and at lvl11. Maybe the class progression could stop there and if needed just give ASI every level after without anything else(except proficiency bonus).

And characters have enough HPs to feel powerfull but not almost immortal as they do around lvl18. And one lvl6 spell is still not world shattering.

 

[JonnyP71]

Do you have a link to the survey?

 

[Edwin Suijkerbuijk]

one intersting thing is that the 17 to 20 level range isen't many peoples favorite 2.5% for players 3% for DMs.
But at the same time it is the level range most people said they want to get more experiance with 45%

 

[GreyLord]

Do you have a link to the survey?

I didn't see the survey either. If it was in the 5e forums, it's no surprise that 5e is up and above every other edition as the selected game of choice.

 

[JonnyP71]

I've now Googled it and found a link posted to it in a Subreddit for D&D 5th edition. Unless it was posted in locations frequented by similar numbers of people discussing all editions then the results for the 5th Question are essentially meaningless.

87% of people using the D&D 5th Edition subreddit prefer 5th Edition! No shock there.

 

[Dkamanus]

I think everyone wants, once upon a time, play a game where the Tier 4 gameplay comes in.

I, myself, am going to make a tier 4 game after Rise of Tiamat. I'm collecting ideas to throw against the party. Since we only play once a month, this is going to be a long jorney, but still, it is something that's missing on D&D 5th edition now. Ideas on how to proceed as a DM in tier 4 games. Some extra puzzles would be awesome as inspiration and it would be nice to see, officialy written, how a Tier 4 game runs.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

The answers seem to make sense.

one intersting thing is that the 17 to 20 level range isen't many peoples favorite 2.5% for players 3% for DMs.
But at the same time it is the level range most people said they want to get more experiance with 45%

This makes sense to me. I wouldn't want to play at those levels for an extended period of time, but I definitely want to reach them. Amongst the classes I enjoy are wizards, and gaining access to high-level spells like plane shift (probably my all time favorite) is a part of what makes me feel like my character is a real wizard who has arrived. Due to the simple fact that those spells exist in the world, as a self-respecting wizard I therefore want to master them.

I wouldn't be able to enjoy an E6 sort of game as a wizard for exactly that reason. Might be fun as a fighter, but if it's never even possible to get polymorph, I'm going to feel much more limited than I would by having a hp cap.

One concern I have is that the designers don't get the wrong impression. Sure, some players and DMs probably don't really want to play at high levels at all, but I think that many more really do want to play at them in moderation--and therefore material supporting them is a good thing. (I think 5e already has enough material in the typical adventuring category to fulfill that purpose, but things like domain management and mass warfare might be good supplements.)

I mean, just because I like one type of food the best, doesn't mean that's all I want to eat, nor does it mean that #10 on my favorite dishes isn't still something I want.

 

[discosoc]

Do you have a link to the survey?

I closed it. I didn't link it here to gain exposure to it or anything (it was done a month ago on Reddit), but wanted to get a snapshot. I do these things a few times a year to see if there are any trends worth noting.

 

[discosoc]

The answers seem to make sense.



This makes sense to me. I wouldn't want to play at those levels for an extended period of time, but I definitely want to reach them. Amongst the classes I enjoy are wizards, and gaining access to high-level spells like plane shift (probably my all time favorite) is a part of what makes me feel like my character is a real wizard who has arrived. Due to the simple fact that those spells exist in the world, as a self-respecting wizard I therefore want to master them.

I wouldn't be able to enjoy an E6 sort of game as a wizard for exactly that reason. Might be fun as a fighter, but if it's never even possible to get polymorph, I'm going to feel much more limited than I would by having a hp cap.

One concern I have is that the designers don't get the wrong impression. Sure, some players and DMs probably don't really want to play at high levels at all, but I think that many more really do want to play at them in moderation--and therefore material supporting them is a good thing. (I think 5e already has enough material in the typical adventuring category to fulfill that purpose, but things like domain management and mass warfare might be good supplements.)

I mean, just because I like one type of food the best, doesn't mean that's all I want to eat, nor does it mean that #10 on my favorite dishes isn't still something I want.

My interpretation of this is that Wizards should seriously consider shifting power levels further down the line a bit. Having access to stuff like Plane Shift might be really cool for the player, but those sorts of spells tend to restrict the nature of adventures that can be run. As it currently stands, adventure designs really kind of start to break down by about level 12, as more and more caster classes gain abilities that allow for total bypassing of content.

On one hand, players might think "well that's not so bad, because we're using our abilities and it feels really good to know they were effective." But for people writing adventures, and the GM's having to prepare them in advance, it's usually not a great feeling to see hours worth of content skipped because the druid turned everyone into a cloud and flew past it. So then it becomes a matter of having to anticipate what your player's can do, and plan accordingly; for published adventure where you can make no assumptions about group makeup or spell selection, that's not possible.

I don't see this core problem being solved until Wizards is willing to get rid of the golden goose that is Wizard spell progression. Things would be totally different if the real crazy spells were held off until 16+.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

My interpretation of this is that Wizards should seriously consider shifting power levels further down the line a bit. Having access to stuff like Plane Shift might be really cool for the player, but those sorts of spells tend to restrict the nature of adventures that can be run. As it currently stands, adventure designs really kind of start to break down by about level 12, as more and more caster classes gain abilities that allow for total bypassing of content.

I'm not sure I see their current adventure design differing substantially from what the results of those surveys would indicate. The adventures have been in the 1-15 range, trending towards the middle levels due to some starting at 3rd, and 1st and 2nd level being lightning fast even if they don't. So a little bit is spent in tier 1, most of the time is spent in tier 2, then some time is spent in tier 3.

If WotC were to end their campaign adventures earlier that would just eliminate 5e published options for tier 3, which isn't what I see is what people want from those charts. What they need to do is include tier 4 somewhere.

On one hand, players might think "well that's not so bad, because we're using our abilities and it feels really good to know they were effective." But for people writing adventures, and the GM's having to prepare them in advance, it's usually not a great feeling to see hours worth of content skipped because the druid turned everyone into a cloud and flew past it. So then it becomes a matter of having to anticipate what your player's can do, and plan accordingly; for published adventure where you can make no assumptions about group makeup or spell selection, that's not possible.

Yep, it will be a challenge for designers. They will have to make adventures that are both fairly open, and rely on things the PCs intentionally choose to do and places they intentionally choose to be (note I said be not go, because we're talking about motivation to adventure somewhere). I think it should be done though. By "a challenge" I mean that in the positive sense of something to be striven for, not the sense of being too difficult to be worth it. Perhaps reviewing older edition high-level adventures could help. Or maybe just brainstorming sessions where some of the people pretend they are playing high level PCs and they bounce around ideas with the player proxies having no input other than to point out how they will bypass the challenges of the adventure. It isn't about coming up with a way to stop the players from everything they want to accomplish, but rather making what the players want to do and what the adventure wants them to do coincide.

A high level adventure needs to be different. Sure, you can just have a 20th level dungeon crawl every now and again, but if you want to really take advantage of high level opportunities you'll want to liberally use politics, planes and principles.

Politics: The PCs could be assumed to be powerful individuals in more than just the "guys you hire to kill monsters" sense. They are movers and shakers of the world, with the sorts of stuff that name level PCs had in older editions. So the politics isn't just about the duke plotting against the king, it may be that "...if possible, this infiltration will happen in a domain under the rulership of one of the PCs..." or "...one or more of the PCs' most powerful rivals (perhaps resurrected if they've already been slain) should unite with the Cabal, bringing all of their resources and influence with them...". And it definitely will be on the scale of "...should the PCs fail to prevent the assassinations, a devastating war between the empires is almost certain to occur..."
Planes: There aren't really a lot of resources clearly putting together the possibilities of high level planar adventures that I'm aware of. Most planar materials are great, but scattered around, so that makes it difficult. Perhaps an "Elminster's Guide to the Planes" with chapter one being about the societies of the exemplar major planar races (with descriptions of the composition of their armies, etc), would work out. Or maybe just a new Planescape book that included more focus on high-level play. The materials are there, but it takes some work to get it all put together. But when you do, you can knock everything up to the next level. Even dungeon crawls can be epic and still make sense out on the planes.
Principles: Step back from the nitty gritty of the adventure, and think first in terms of absolute principles. Not just Good vs. Evil (though keep that), but all sorts of other questions, paradoxes, etc. Then weave the entire adventure around it. Imagine a puzzle from a sphinx that is a pain to answer. It might normally get you looking for other ways around it. If the puzzle is clearly designed so that solving it the "right way" rather than cheating with powers is a test of moral character/resolve/etc, it might normally just annoy the players But what if the entire adventure is designed around exactly those sorts of questions. Now you aren't trying to cheat at the riddle (unless that is one of the themes being explored), because you are willingly participating in the premise. And there is no reason in such a situation to directly punish characters for finding a way to power cheat if they find one anyway, because solving it with guile might in and of itself inform important elements of such an adventure. Is solving that puzzle with guile rather than resolve the message you want to send to the moral fabric of the cosmos? Maybe it is. The players get to decide, and a cool adventure event happens either way.

In these adventures, make death just be a speed bump. Or better yet, make it be part of the journey.

Now, not everyone is going to want to play these adventures. They aren't for everyone. But neither was the Planescape: Torment computer game, and that is a real masterpiece.

So, basically, don't try to make high level adventures the same as low level adventures with bigger numbers and special effects. Make them into something entirely different that actually works with the capabilities of characters at those levels.

I don't see this core problem being solved until Wizards is willing to get rid of the golden goose that is Wizard spell progression. Things would be totally different if the real crazy spells were held off until 16+.

That would be a real let down for me.