D&D 5E What's Your Level Sweet Spot?

[Nebulous]

1st-9th for me running games. I just as soon not play D&D past 10th. The highest level character we had was a 13th level sorcereress in Princes.

 

[Nebulous]

But at high levels, it sometimes feels like the PCs are just unstoppable no matter what gets thrown at them...which really frees me up as a GM to throw insanely unbalances situations at them with the confidence that they'll at least be able to survive, and the gonzo ways they come up with to try and triumph are always fun.

This right here is why I don't like running high level D&D. They are nearly unstoppable, and the work I have to put into the game behind the scenes to create a challenge, well, I quit enjoying the game and it becomes tedious homework.

 

[Ancalagon]

5-8 is the sweet spot imo.

 

[Zardnaar]

This right here is why I don't like running high level D&D. They are nearly unstoppable, and the work I have to put into the game behind the scenes to create a challenge, well, I quit enjoying the game and it becomes tedious homework.

This. My players are level 9 and I'm kinda done. Gamestore closes in a month so suck it up.

 

[slobster]

This right here is why I don't like running high level D&D. They are nearly unstoppable, and the work I have to put into the game behind the scenes to create a challenge, well, I quit enjoying the game and it becomes tedious homework.

Yeah I totally get that. My epiphany moment was realizing that "balance" doesn't really have much meaning or utility to how my players and I play at high levels. Especially considering I freely hand out power-ups over the course of the preceding 15 or so levels like powerful pet companions, blessings from previous adventures, unique magic items, etc. So my PCs are STRONG when they get up there in levels.

So I don't feel bad pitting them against demon lords, elder dragons, beholder cities, babysitting newly born demigods...it lets me just freely design the craziest situations I want and then let the PCs loose, knowing that even if I overshoot the opposition in power the PCs can likely come up with some plot to escape or circumvent the obstacle, while if I undershoot and they trounce the foes I can subtly throw some extra HP and lair actions in on the fly and it feels good to triumph anyway.

But that's just me. I love high level play more for the freedom and wackiness it enables than for the specific "balance" of the ruleset at those levels.

 

[Nebulous]

So I don't feel bad pitting them against demon lords, elder dragons, beholder cities, babysitting newly born demigods...it lets me just freely design the craziest situations I want and then let the PCs loose, knowing that even if I overshoot the opposition in power the PCs can likely come up with some plot to escape or circumvent the obstacle, while if I undershoot and they trounce the foes I can subtly throw some extra HP and lair actions in on the fly and it feels good to triumph anyway.

But that's just me. I love high level play more for the freedom and wackiness it enables than for the specific "balance" of the ruleset at those levels.

If I could get into that mindset I might could enjoy it, but in general I get overwhelmed by all the cool/ridiculous stuff PCs can do by then, and it just breaks the monsters. Although I do that sometimes too, I overshoot the challenge, I don't how the hell they'll survive an encounter, but fairly sure they will somehow.

 

[Monayuris]

I like 1 to 5 best.

After that point, characters just get too many resources and powers a lot of the challenge starts to go away.

I’ve had similar issues with 4e.

As characters gain levels, powers, and resources... more effort needs to be put into encounter building to create a challenging encounter. This includes having to include larger numbers of creatures and more powerful creatures. This starts increasing the complexity of encounters and increasing the time it takes to resolve one.

 

[slobster]

If I could get into that mindset I might could enjoy it, but in general I get overwhelmed by all the cool/ridiculous stuff PCs can do by then, and it just breaks the monsters. Although I do that sometimes too, I overshoot the challenge, I don't how the hell they'll survive an encounter, but fairly sure they will somehow.

I totally understand that, too. I also chose high levels as my "favorite" because I so rarely get to play games at those levels. Most of my games last in the 1-7 ranges, and while I love play at those level as being the most strategic and the closest to traditional "dangerous" dungeon crawling adventure, I also see them a lot more than I see high level play.

If D&D were all gonzo high level play all the time, I'd have a serious problem with it! As a reward for sticking it out with a group of players for a long term campaign, it's a lot of fun.

 

[jgsugden]

It is great at every level. Iknow a lot of people complain about higher levels, but that really is a matter of people not understanding the differences between a high level game and a low level game. A lot of the challenges players face at low levels become trivial when a spell can do all your legwork - but that is a feature, not a bug. It allows players to feel like powerful heroes. It just requires a different mentality when building the adventures to let players have these successes and offer different types of challenges at the higher tiers.

 

[Odysseus]

So far from my experience its 4 to 11. Less than 3 the PC are too flimsy, and over 12 your not challenged much.