D&D 5E Why Do Higher Levels Get Less Play?

[Umbran]

...but maybe if that was an actual choice they could make, more would pick the latter?

Eh? The point we run into is that higher level play speaks to greater power, but it doesn't speak to greater character development.

Once you have sufficiently explored who a character is at lower levels, the upper levels are at risk of narrowing down to become mostly a tactical exercise. And while I think there's some market for that, I would be unsurprised if broadly the draw of RPGs drops off as character exploration narrows to mostly be in tactical concerns.

We can actually look at fiction for the point here: There are some powerful characters (like Superman and Wonder Woman) who are notoriously difficult to write well in large part because handling what they can do tends to overwhelm the story, and the character's personality ceases to play a large part in the turns of events.

 

[Micah Sweet]

This is pure anecdotal and just based on feeling.

But i think that high levels were always meant to be endgame content. You hit them few session before the big epic finale of campaign, you enjoy your moment of glory, epilogue rolls, campaign ends and that's it. Avengers assembled, fought Thanos and that's it. It was never intended for prolonged campaigns. Dnd is based around heroes journey. Start small, overcome increasingly bigger challenges and grow in power until you are strong enough to fight off main antagonist. Once you do, go into the sunset and retire, leaving room for new generation of heroes.

Lack of solid tools in both DMG and MM or even dedicated books supports that theory (at least in part).

I completely agree, but I also believe it doesn't have to be that way. Not designing for longer and more involved exploration of play at that level was a choice, and there's always time to make new choices.

 

[Micah Sweet]

and that material needs to be transform D&D into “Demigods and Domains” rather than some dreary splatbook thats a really just a bunch of munchkin tcg “+10 Ancient” cards pasted together

I believe @Upper_Krust 's forthcoming book is meant to do exactly that.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Eh? The point we run into is that higher level play speaks to greater power, but it doesn't speak to greater character development.

To which my first thought would be, but does it speak to lesser character development, or just the same? If its just the same then its not a valid criticism.

Once you have sufficiently explored who a character is at lower levels, the upper levels are at risk of narrowing down to become mostly a tactical exercise. And while I think there's some market for that, I would be unsurprised if broadly the draw of RPGs drops off as they character exploration narrows to mostly be in tactical concerns.

Which is why I always suggest with greater power comes greater responsibilities.

High Tier should add running a Stronghold.
Epic Tier should add running a Country
Immortal Tier should add running a Religion & Divine Realm (the Divine Realm being a stand in for a 'Planar Country' of sorts) having both splits the focus of the immortal.
etc.

We can actually look at fiction for the point here: There are some powerful characters (like Superman and Wonder Woman) who are notoriously difficult to write well in large part because handling what they can do tends to overwhelm the story, and the character's personality ceases to play a large part in the turns of events.

It might be difficult to write good stories with incredibly powerful characters but its certainly not impossible, far from it.

I agree its easy to fall into the trap of letting the spectacle dominate the story (as Clint pointed out lots of blockbuster movies do that), but again you can amp up the emotional resonance if its not just simply the character on the line.

Superman fighting Zod (or whomever) is just standard fare.
But if the stakes are the survival of the Earth then we have scale.
If the stakes are Superman has to choose between saving the Earth and saving Lois then its also personal.

Of course Superman being Superman he would have to pull some miracle out of a hat and somehow achieve the impossible and do both.

 

[Upper_Krust]

I believe @Upper_Krust 's forthcoming book is meant to do exactly that.

Well I can advocate (in the book) that an Immortal Tier will be better if the Player has Worshippers on the Mortal Plane and a Divine Realm on another Plane of their choice and give all the rules for that.

But I noticed when I did this back in my 3rd Edition - Immortals Handbook: Ascension book (2007 and updated in 2023) that most gamers skipped over all the worshipper stuff, to get to all the crazy powers and dare I say "Munchkin +10 swords".

However, this time I think I have solved the issue so that Power* (XP) and Glory* (Worship Points) which add up to Quintessence (ie. Divinity) work in slightly different ways. Worship has two very strong benefits but also a few minor weaknesses. So there is enough incentive there to choose Glory over Power because its a better Reward but just with more Risk.

To briefly clarify, when Level 20 characters gain XP they can choose to instead turn that XP into Glory (Worship Points). A character's XP (+WP) determines its Divine Rank. The amount of XP a character converts to Worship, is up to them and does not affect the character's overall Divine Rank. So if characters want to be a god (more WP than XP) or an anti-god (more XP than WP) its entirely up to them.

...anyway to circle back to my point, yes I want the focus of the Immortal Tier to engage with the God vs. Anti-god friction, vis-a-vis the juxtaposition of having to sometimes choose between the safety of Worshippers or the immortal's Divine Realm. However, you still need a hefty dose of Craziness because that is where half the fun lies in these Epic and Immortal Tier campaigns, so expect 40+ new materials alone, 80 new Artifacts and you just won't believe how ridiculous the items get - no sense spoiling the surprises though.

 

[GrimCo]

High Tier should add running a Stronghold.
Epic Tier should add running a Country
Immortal Tier should add running a Religion & Divine Realm (the Divine Realm being a stand in for a 'Planar Country' of sorts) having both splits the focus of the immortal.
etc.

As an option, that would be cool. But not everyone want's to play fantasy simcity. Some people still want to kick ass and chew bubble gum. And they want to do it at grand scale. Domain management fundamentally changes game play unless it's something that is done via few rolls between sessions. They are interested in personal power growth and how much cool stuff they can do personally.

 

[Umbran]

To which my first thought would be, but does it speak to lesser character development, or just the same? If its just the same then its not a valid criticism.

See notes about Superman and Wonder Woman - when what you can do becomes more central to play than why you choose to do it, there are media other than RPGs that are apt to handle it better.

Which is why I always suggest with greater power comes greater responsibilities.

Responsibilities aren't character. Adding more tactical concerns does not counter my point.

High Tier should add running a Stronghold.
Epic Tier should add running a Country

I submit that those would be better served with their own entire games, rather than something bolted on the side of a small-group tactics and action-adventure game like D&D. Especially when the story that personal power of violence naturally leads to power over the people of a nation is... fraught.

It might be difficult to write good stories with incredibly powerful characters but its certainly not impossible, far from it.

Nobody said is was impossible.
The thread asks a question - Why do higher levels get less play? Among the answers may be that writing compelling content that calls for an RPG at that power level is hard. That it isn't impossible doesn't change that it is hard, and doing much of the same thing is pretty easy at lower levels.

Superman fighting Zod (or whomever) is just standard fare.
But if the stakes are the survival of the Earth then we have scale.

As has been noted by many a viewer of long-running programs, while one might assume that even greater risk makes a story more emotionally resonant, it often doesn't. The game of having to one-up your own stakes to hold interest is where "jumping the shark" comes from, after all.

If the stakes are Superman has to choose between saving the Earth and saving Lois then its also personal.

But you have probably already told that story several times over at lower levels - Lois or the innocent bystander? Lois or the innocent bystander orphan child? Lois or the entire Daily Planet building? Lois or the city? Lois or the country? Lois or the world? Lois or the Universe?

It is... kind of repetitive, and after a couple of iterations doesn't reveal anything new about Superman, as it isn't a fundamentally new question, especially when Superman never seems to fail to save both anyway.

That's what I mean by it reducing to a tactical exercise. We already know what Superman will choose - the only question is how he manages it this time.

 

[mamba]

Failing or putting it in?

While the 5e DMG is actually a very good book with regard to what is in it, I don't think it really does a good or even decent job at teaching high level play. I'd give WotC a D grade.

the question was about putting it in, and you answered it…

 

[mamba]

Another question might be: Why would anyone want to play Level 12 when they could play Level 20...or beyond!

because I am not the least bit interested in things the higher levels make possible.

 

[Umbran]

Another question might be: Why would anyone want to play Level 12 when they could play Level 20...or beyond!

Another question might be, why would anyone want to play D&D level 20 trying to be a god, when they could pay Nobilis?

Why expand the D&D framework to handle phenomenal cosmic power, instead of using a framework that has that power as part of the base design considerations?

The answer to that question is apt to inform the question the OP poses.