What's with high-powered campaigns?

[Aeric]

I've only played with a small number of people who were interested in characters that were more powerful than the challenges set before them. These people were called "twinks" and "power-gamers" and were quickly shown the door.

I have, on the other hand, seen a rise in the popularity of games that are both more powerful and more challenging at low levels. I have some thoughts on why this is.

In my experience, most DMs like to start their campaigns at a low level, usually 1st. In the fifteen-some-odd years that I have been playing D&D, I have never played in a game where the characters started at 1st level and got higher than 12th level. By that point, the story has run its course and everyone involved is ready to move onto something new. I think it takes a fantastic DM to keep their games fresh and their players interested after a year or so of regular gaming.

For this reason, I don't think a lot of people get the chance to play higher-level characters unless they start at a higher level. In such games, the players and the DM are getting a taste of what they would get if the typical campaign (again, in my experience) didn't die around levels 10-12.

I also think the reason that low-powered games are less popular these days is because those of us who have been playing for a while have played low level characters (where most DMs I know like to start campaigns) a bazillion times now. One way to spice things up for those first couple of levels is to juice up the characters with high stats, funky races or classes, etc.

Anyways, that's my take on the matter.

 

[UniversalMonster]

Sorry Li, misunderstandment on my part!

We're actually in agreement. I'm all about standard characters. I interpreted your concept of "high powered campaigns" and characters to mean characters that go up in levels, rather than guys that get extra points and free skills and feats.

 

[Dog Moon]

Originally posted by Li Shenron
So my question, why aren't we ever looking forward to play a low-powered campaign? I mean adventures where you are less powerful than the challenges you have to face...

The group I'm in doesn't like low-level campaigns. Why? It's because we can't do anything. We fight a couple of creatures and need to rest. A trap is sprung and we spend a large amount of resources on that simple potion of moderate wounds. Although not necessarily true depending on the campaign/character, but I've found that my group likes to do more different things. They like to have more options. They like a variety. It is simply not possible at low levels.

I was once in a campaign that was a low-magic campaign and though the DM was good, it wasn't as interesting because we were limited in our options. For us, it was our lack of options rather than lack of power which annoyed us.

Originally posted by Li Shenron
A few players I've gamed with were quite obsessed by computer games and I think they learned from those to have more fun if their characters had an easy time in every battle, bashing everything with ease and minimal strategy.

In my campaign, the battles are tough and the opponents use tactics and magical items to the fullest, as best as possible. The group always groans when I look at a creature which is pummelling and go, 'Wow, I missed that ability.' They dislike easy battles like in an arcade mode because they pose no threat. They like lifethreatening battles. I don't understand how people could like doing that. One person told me of a friend who killed a Pit Fiend in one hit. I was thinking 'Where's the fun in that?'

Well, I guess the point I was trying to make was that low-powered campaigns are boring because you can't really do anything. You're stuck doing one thing over and over again. In high-powered campaigns, there is so much you can do and it makes it more fun.

Maybe someone else's definition of high-powered is having an AC of 60, an AR of +50, and deals an average of 60 damage per hit, and in that case, I have no answer for you. I personally tire of characters that are just those three things.

Don't know if that helped...

 

[Akrasia]

The group I'm in doesn't like low-level campaigns. Why? It's because we can't do anything. ...

Ummm.... how about role-playing? :\

 

[hong]

Ummm.... how about role-playing? :\

Deep, that.

 

[hong]

But.. Why would anyone want to be forced?

It's the whole roleplaying-as-self-improvement meme. It's spawned a billion-dollar industry of self-help books, you know.


Hong "looking forward to the publication of 7 Habits of Highly Effective Munchkins" Ooi

 

[Inconsequenti-AL]

I think the high stats thing might go back to 2nd edition...

IIRC, a 15 there offered about the same benefit as a 12 now?

Took quite a while for some people I know to adjust to the new numbers?

 

[Blue]

I see both high and low powered games, and it's two valid but different feels. Nothing wrong with prefering one feel over another. It's like chocolate or vanilla - both make good ice cream. Okay, it's like chocolate and double dutch chouolate super fudge twirl with nuts.

I run a low powered world. Standard stat generation (and several PCs have penalty stats), much lower wealth/magic item handout then standard for DMG. Makes things challenging, especially now that they've gone from 1st to 11th level. My players enjoy it.

One of the games I'm in is the other end of the scale. Very high stat generation system based in a high-magic (FR) world with a high-level campaign. These people can take on encounter CRs +6 highter and have a good fight. One player who really likes that mode of play talks about "player empowerment", but for me it's just a different feel. Epic, if you use the english word and not the gaming term; these are serious heroes.

To compare it to Tolkien, some people enjoy playing Sam, Pippin and Merri, while other enjoy playing Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli. And many (like myself) enjoy both, depending on the tone of the campaign and how the DM runs it. Both work, it depends on your style.

Cheers,
=Blue

 

[UniversalMonster]

And some people like to play Gandalf and Sauron and possibly a treant Barbarian...

 

[random user]

You can make it a wash by just making encounters harder if you buff characters.

The reason why I think my players would like to have enchanced stats is to have more tactical versitility.

Players generally show some characteristics of roleplaying and some of tactical planning. While it's fairly easy to make an interesting character in terms of background and personality, it's much harder to create a character that isn't one dimensional in combat and tactics when you have low stats.

Now some people don't care about that, but others don't care for a game where they can predict most of their moves in advance because they are limited to a small subset of choices.

This is especially true of a fighter who ends up with 1 skill point per level, or a wizard who needs a 20 to hit with either a melee or ranged weapon, etc. As a player it's annoying to come up to an encounter and think, "well I'd like to negotiate but no one speaks sylvan. Our rogue made a character that was a good spotter (spot/listen/search) and con artist (disguise/appraise/bluff/sense motive/sleight of hand/escape artist) so he can't even attempt to hide to ambush them. I'd like to lay down a trap, but my character with an int of 8 would never think to attempt that. Oh, someone else thought of a trap, but no one was able to take rope use. Have they been here long? Doh, I would have liked to take track as a feat, but I didn't have enough skill points to advance survival so it would have been a useless feat. etc etc"

That of course is an exaggeration, but it is true that the higher the stats are, in general, the more options will be available to a party. For a party who likes to think of non-obvious or clever ways of dealing with encounters, low stat characters are very limiting.

In addition, it's very hard to use some character concepts with low stats. A fighter that used to be a professional blacksmith? That's pretty much hard to do at low stats without also hurting your ability to fulfill your party role. A monk who is a master of languages? Also tough to do. Actually, if you use a low stat (like 25 point buy) you're going to have a hard time making an effective tactical monk at all.

I'm not saying that this is always the case, but I do think there are reasons players might want to have higher stats aside from the obvious munchkin-ism that can be associated with it.