• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Which "phase" of D&D do you prefer?

What phase of D&D do you prefer?

  • Levels 1-5. Start it low, keep it low.

    Votes: 67 26.2%
  • Levels 6-10. More power, more options; not insane.

    Votes: 160 62.5%
  • Levels 11-15. Lots of power, lots of options.

    Votes: 55 21.5%
  • Levels 16-20+. Bordering on epic, or epic.

    Votes: 18 7.0%
  • No particular preference, or other (please explain)

    Votes: 38 14.8%


log in or register to remove this ad

Our groups' experience has laid within the 1st through 10th levels, and that's where we seem most comfortable. However, I am attempting to run my Forgotten Realms game as long as possible, hopefully to the high teens if possible, because I've always wanted to have a long-running high-level game, and because we all want the challenge of high-level play eventually.

But 1st through 10th is without doubt the most played, whether because of XP progression, or just because so many DM's interest wanders after that point, I don't know.

But the revelation to me that one doesn't have to play the same game all the darned time was a big one. This may shock a lot of you, but this revelation did not come to me until two years ago! It's something I knew, but really didn't internalize. Now, we'll play FR, but switch to someone else's game a while, I'll switch to one-shots a while, and then we'll come back when I'm recharged. We've kept it going for 7 months this way now.
 

My favourite is 11-15. It the point where the powers of the players are considerable, yet the bookkeeping hasn't become too painful for DMs or players.

As a player I really don't like the lowest levels, but as a DM those are quite enjoyable - adventures are easier to make, less bookkeeping and everything is well-defined. As a player thats boring. Character concepts that require multiclassing / PrCs are also impossible at lower levels (not that I ever had had a multiclass / PrC character).
 

I have to agree with the majority, I prefer levels between 3 and 10, both as a player and as a DM.

The first 2 levels are fine as a player, but as a DM I always have problems about incorporating rookies into the plot, such as why would someone give a mission to 1st level characters? ;)

I think 4th and 5th level spells simply rock! They can already perform incredible things without being too cheesy or too much save-or-die.

At those low-mid levels characters have enough options to choose from during game time, many spells to prepare or skills to use with high results, many feats each, but at the same time they don't get bury by them (I tried high level play and it's hard for a player). As a DM I can offer battles with lots of lesser monsters - which I like very much - without being restricted to rats and bats, but at the same time I can already have fiendish encounters which are my favourite :) .
 

Tsyr said:
The game itself maybe... I dunno, I need to level at LEAST every 6 months.


you only think you need it. ;)

in our game you would get to really experience each level. you get the full flavor; taste, feel, smell, look, and attitude.

i had one player (the only one) playing an elf, take 40 years off in game to research a spell.

a couple years later (in real life) he brought his character back. the humans he had adventured with were now retired. so he took their scions out on an adventure. ;)

we played long term.
 

I like lvl 10-20 most in regular D&D games. At those levels the PCs are over the top; they dont walk anywhere, they teleport. They can take on armies if they want and they are the kinds of powers in the world that Gandalf and Aragorn are in LoTR.

IMO the lowest levels are kind of dull; combats are not really exciting, the warriors rules everything and it's hard to come up with reasons for adventuring (like someone above said, why would someone hire the PCs?).

Levels 6-10 is like lower levels but with funkier opponents and more tools. They are powerful enough to take on smaller armies but not powerful enough to avoid walking/riding to places. It gets a bit more interesting but I really find those levels to be not too fun either.
 

Darklone said:
Ooooooh, D&D movie. Heroic Fantasy with lotsa magic items, nice RPing shown about the different scroll/wand/potions stuff, magic items, talking doors, lotsa colours, big hero, cuddly gnomes, beautiful women, stylish villains, swordfights that show 4+ attacks per round, disarms, trips, bull rushes, trolls, dragons, racial diversity and above all:
[/b]
Sounds like a fun game.
What, do you expect me to kill Kobolds with a rusty dagger for the entirety of a campaign? What kind of crap is that? Next, you'll be telling me that I'm not worthy of a Masterwork item until level 7. ;)


(Notice, that if you put a smiley after a derogatory comment, it's not derogatory anymore! Ah, the glories of the internet.)
 

Joshua Dyal said:
Exactly. It's well and good for hong to find relevance for high-level play in wuxia, but since many D&D players aren't interested in wuxia and especially aren't interested in their D&D game resembling wuxia it's a problematic relationship, at best.

But wuxia is exactly like DnD. People riding off on quests, adventurers that are more or less complwetely removed from society. DnD models wuxia much more than it models almost any other fantesy style, whether the players realise it or not. And not just at high levels. Great post Hong.

Anyway, I said 10-20. I like low levels, and i like mid levels, and I like starting at 1st level, but I am really enjoying my occasional games with my old DM (twice a year or so when I'm back in NZ) as my character is now 15th level, the highest I've ever played. And wizards are so much more fun once you hit 10th level it's not even funny.
 

die_kluge said:
There has to be some basis, if we're talking about a movie here, for why the barbarian's sword just isn't very effective against a creature with a DR 10/Law. Val Kilmer: "My sword isn't effective - cleric, can you align this to law so that I might smite my enemies?" Audiences would never buy that.
i think what audiences wouldn't buy is Val Kilmer playing a barbarian. ;)
 

D&D seems to get boring about 9th-level, when characters gain access to instantaneous information, instaneous travel, and the ability to cure themselves of any negative condition, including death. At that point, it starts to sharply deviate from fantastic fiction and feels more like a PC game where everything's about "cutting to the chase". Scry or commune the next place to go, teleport there, and after the battle raise your dead back up and collect the treasure.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top