The talismanic lure of high levels

[Snoweel]

So if levels 11-20 are so broken, why don't YUO switch to a 10-level campaign and just double your spells and magic items per level?

I'm unaware of any CR 10 obstacle that would require DC 43. Spotting an invisible creature 20 feet away is DC 24. Following tracks that are a week old, over hard ground, is a base DC of 27. Crafting a complex or superior item is DC 20. Opening a good lock is DC 30.

All tasks that a 20th level character is more easily able to accomplish than a 10th level character.

There is more to D&D than combat, y'know?

The more extreme skill DCs get, the more removed from reality the tasks are. Since one of the aims that many people who like "low magic" seem to have is to get the game to a closer version of reality

If I wanted reality, I'd have NO MAGIC. Big difference.

For me, a reduction in magic allows me to more easily challenge the players, as well as make it easier to imagine what such a fantastic world would look like.

With less options for solving problems, the more likely it will be that I can craft situations of dramatic tension and thus have greater enjoyment in my game.

It's like comic books - sure the characters are challenged, but since I can't relate to them or the high-powered, fanciful challenges they face, I don't really enjoy comics, and so I don't read them.

This is why I want a low-magic D&D game while still allowing for cinematic action and hyper-capable characters.

Now _you_ may have an entirely different vision of "low magic" to everyone else

Actually, there is a plethora (yes, a plethora) of users here who are making an effort to point out that low magic =/= grim and gritty or realism.

That's why I keep AC and hp. I *like* over the top, I just don't like the overabundance of problem-solving options that magic presents.

 

[hong]

So if levels 11-20 are so broken, why don't YUO switch to a 10-level campaign and just double your spells and magic items per level?

Well, I don't want to change anything. Or rather, I don't want to change anything about the power level or magic level in D&D beyond what I've already changed. I don't really mind fighters flying around or wizards killing people with a gesture.

All tasks that a 20th level character is more easily able to accomplish than a 10th level character.

There is more to D&D than combat, y'know?

I'm not sure what point you're making here.

For me, a reduction in magic allows me to more easily challenge the players, as well as make it easier to imagine what such a fantastic world would look like.

With less options for solving problems, the more likely it will be that I can craft situations of dramatic tension and thus have greater enjoyment in my game.

Sure. And the big game-breaking spells are all typically 5th level or higher: raise dead, teleport, greater scrying, plane shift, etc. Which brings us back to the point of this thread: D&D already supports the no-game-breaking-spells option. It just doesn't do this if you also want to retain the historical and psychological lure of 20 levels of advancement.

This is why I want a low-magic D&D game while still allowing for cinematic action and hyper-capable characters.

You can have cinematic action and hyper-capable characters at 10th level. Heck, I had it IMC at 7th level. Frickin' berserking barbarian/druid with a greatsword, treating my poor orcs with such disdain....

Actually, there is a plethora (yes, a plethora) of users here who are making an effort to point out that low magic =/= grim and gritty or realism.

That's why I keep AC and hp. I *like* over the top, I just don't like the overabundance of problem-solving options that magic presents.

But that's the point! I like OTT too. One of the things I can't stand is the Rogue Spear approach to things, where the players treat everything like a special ops mission. I'd much rather have them jump in boots and all, and to hell with the consequences. I LIKE the wahoo feel.

And I GET the wahoo feel, even though the group is nowhere near 20th level, and in fact even when we were 7th level. In fact, if I were to follow the book, I would probably _lose_ that wahoo feel the higher level the campaign gets, due to the rock-paper-scissors aspect of the game. You must have this defense to counteract that attack, or you're screwed.

 

[Darklone]

I think I repeat myself, but IMHO D&D magic quickly degenerates into a stone-scissor-paper game. That's not necessarily bad, but I like to keep the efforts of learning and preparing spells low...

IME, PC survivability is highest between level 4- 10. At higher levels, insta kill spells, effects or damages quickly annihilate a player, at lower levels one lucky hit can take you out (but honestly, how many PCs of level 10 can survive the abovementioned 125 hitpoints hit? Probably only a lucky mage with mirror image or concealment that works).

That's why I prefer games at these levels and take care that the players enjoy their superpower and influence in the world.

 

[Snoweel]

Aah, but if you nerf magic, then PCs have higher surviveability at higher levels.

 

[hong]

Aah, but if you nerf magic, then PCs have higher surviveability at higher levels.

Interestingly, that's exactly what I did IMC:

- No 9th level spells. Most of these are basically plot devices anyway.

- Many instakill spells removed and those that remain are mostly limited to an evil necromancer cult. These spells deal 4d6 points of Con drain, instead of killing outright.

- Teleport sends you to one of 8 fixed locations, instead of being a go-anywhere spell.

- Changed polymorph and alter self significantly, so people don't spend half their adventuring careers as trolls or hill giants.


That said, three sessions ago, I had a fight in the sky between a fallen ghaele eladrin and the airborne party using air walk. Like I said, I like over-the-top.

 

[Frostmarrow]

My 3.0 DMG specifically says that you can run a game with 1/2 the XP and 1/2 the wealth-per-encounter, and it will all work out Balanced (ie "good").

The problem I see with this is how do you cut all treasure in half? How do you divide a +1 or even a +2 longsword, for example?

If I only award half the XP but keep treasure as typed (in most published modules), what kind of trouble can I expect?

 

[rounser]

Any comments, people?

Yes.

Being able to get to level 20 makes me feel like a Real Man with a Big Weiner. What you're saying threatens that and makes me feel vulnerable, deep down inside.

How do you sleep at night?

 

[Vaxalon]

Changed polymorph and alter self significantly, so people don't spend half their adventuring careers as trolls or hill giants.

You used the 3.5 version? And even in 3.0, Alter Self couldn't make you into a troll or hill giant, because it couldn't alter your size.

Hong, it's not like you to make big rules flubs. Are you feeling alright?

 

[hong]

You don't use alter self to turn into a troll, true. You use it to turn into a lizard man for the +5 natural armour AC bonus. Or in 3.0, as a poor man's fly spell since you could grow wings with it.

 

[Frostmarrow]

I've looked it up. If I get half of the XP but all of the treasure I will be almost as rich as a 13th level character at 10th level. That doesn't sound too bad since the number of magic items I can comfortably carry is limited anyway (one headband or hat...).

By the way a 20th level character has more than fifteen times the wealth a 10th level character does.