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

[Reynard]

Not really. The rule-base is different, and it depends on what those extra steps are in any case.

I was being "clever." I played both. I actually think the "balance" between B/X and AD&D is 2E.

On topic, each of those 3 games fails at high level play from the perspective that aside from the inclusion of very powerful magic items, high levels really only reward casters.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I was being "clever." I played both. I actually think the "balance" between B/X and AD&D is 2E.

On topic, each of those 3 games fails at high level play from the perspective that aside from the inclusion of very powerful magic items, high levels really only reward casters.

Too clever for me, sorry. I have a tendency to take statements literally unless I have a reason to do otherwise.

 

[EthanSental]

Our group is we barely play once every 6 to 8 weeks so we never get there and if the gap between sessions is long enough and not enough vested “story” we can sometimes just start a new campaign.

 

[OB1]

A recent 5E D&D game had the group of 2nd level characters track the goblin bandits to a small island out in a lake. As the characters were all typical 5E 'all combat' types, the game came to a halt as the players could not figure out anyway to get out to the island. Nothing on their character sheets had anything like 'travel to an island'. And they did not really want to "think" too much: they just wanted a fun casual all combat game.

This is an example of a very simple problem, with several very easy and simple solutions. But ones beyond what players were willing or able to do.

And this is just a low level problem. As the levels go up the problems get much harder.

Facinating. I've thankfully never had that issue, I was more talking about the time and head space investment needed for high level. As a DM, you have to understand the capabilities and preferences of your players very well, and as a player, you have to be engaged with the fiction of the world around you while also understanding every detail of your capabilities. 20th level combat is only interesting when it is ultra specific to the play group, hence why WotC doesn't put out much high level adventure content.

 

[Reynard]

A recent 5E D&D game had the group of 2nd level characters track the goblin bandits to a small island out in a lake. As the characters were all typical 5E 'all combat' types, the game came to a halt as the players could not figure out anyway to get out to the island. Nothing on their character sheets had anything like 'travel to an island'. And they did not really want to "think" too much: they just wanted a fun casual all combat game.

This is an example of a very simple problem, with several very easy and simple solutions. But ones beyond what players were willing or able to do.

And this is just a low level problem. As the levels go up the problems get much harder.

I am going to be honest: based on your history of posts about players, I do not believe this is how it went down. I am.NOT saying you are lying, but you have consistently demonstrated a anti-player bias here, and so I assume you probably shut them down over and over.

NOTHING in D&D limits the idea of making it "out to an island." Only a GM can do that.

My advice? Lighten up. Listen to your players. Realize they want to enjoy the game too. Failing that, equip them with neuralink so they can figure out what narrow solution you had in mind from the beginning.

 

[Minigiant]

The following non-caster classes/subclasses in 5e continue to scale excellently:
The Fighter, who at 20th level is a chainsaw capable of attacking minimum of 8 times two rounds in a row twice per short rest. Assuming even a basic magic weapon (+1d6), the fighter can do damage equal to a failed save against the 1/day meteor swarm with each set of attacks. Some subclasses can do substantially better, and with a level-appropriate magic weapon such as a vorpal sword, the Fighter can expect to probably land an instant kill somewhere in those two rounds.

The Zealot barbarian, who becomes immune to death by hit point loss at 14th level and acquires an almost unbeatable grapple check.

The monk, who can turn invisible and gain resistance to all damage except force at 18th level, making himself an excellent infiltrator and off-tank, while also being one of the three best classes in the game for saving throws (alongside paladin and artificer).

All the other classes except rogue have spellcasting (spellcasting creep is a different topic).

As another specific example, rogues are the best generalist skill users, but I'm finding that the Battlemaster may not be far behind. I'm running a Battlemaster war leader in a campaign right now. At level 7 with Expertise from a feat, his Persuasion check is 1d20+8, + 1d8 from a maneuver. At level 20 with a Charisma of only 14, he'd be at 1d20+14 + 1d12 for a persuasion check range of 16-46. I'm not sure any spellcaster except Bard can keep up with this, and there are at least 6 skills Battlemasters can do this for. Even the 8th level spell Glibness doesn't do anything other than set a high floor for what the spellcaster's lowest roll can be.

Not every class scales as well to 20 (ranger), but most classes in 5e have pretty good scaling features. Having run high level several times... the non-casters are fine.

The issue is an always been.
None of this is epic enough to match the spells of the same levels.

Especially since skills don't have any defined epic DC. The effects of most skill DCs above 15 or so are more or less up to DM interpretation. So your high skill rolls are really unreliable and unknowable in effect if not an opposed roll for a defined term.

But spells and magic of higher level have definitions.

It's like Comic book Summoners. Often in comics and anime, the spellcasters cannot summon a warrior or expert that closely matches an equal power summoner or expert. Not even close. The warrior and effortless beat a monster summoned by a mage and an expert can outskill the divinations of a seer. This makes the mage want to keep Superman and Batman around.

AKA ain't no spell that lets to summon or transform into that holds a candle to a member of the Bat family crashing out.

In 5e, magic is a little to close to replicating warriors and experts to make martials feel on the same level. High level Martials are strong but not overwhelming unless you make them also unwieldy and draining.

 

[GrimCo]

Our group is we barely play once every 6 to 8 weeks so we never get there and if the gap between sessions is long enough and not enough vested “story” we can sometimes just start a new campaign.

Sad to hear that, but if it's worth anything, i feel you. My group had period like that, one year we played 11 session total. We would manage 2-3 in a row, then month or two nothing, then session or two in a row, then month or two nothing, with 3 and a half month brake from july to mid september and so on. We dropped trying to play any type of campaign. Next year, we played 6 oneshots and that was it.

 

[tetrasodium]

The fact that I can run a high level campaign with the tools provided only in the core 5e books proves that to be false. There are plenty high level giants, dragons and outsides for me to use. My preference for there to be more variety is only that. A preference, not a lack of tools.

We were not discussing the ability to run "a" high level campaign. This came up because of how 5e simplifies and streamlines away so many of the subsystems that support the GM in running broader styles of campaign other than low agency one shot string style.. that takes more than "A" high level campaign

The problem is that 5e gives zero training on how to use those tools and new DMs are almost sure to screw it up trying to run high level games the same way they run low level games, and that doesn't work.

As others have pointed out, successful high level play really depends on a solid trek across the lower levels being able to grow a solid foundation for the high level stretch of that campaign. That's a big problem for 5e because the mechanical support for that trek to cover much beyond a pair of rocket boots on rails to off the scale power when previously the GM & players could spend more time working on a wider foundation across those levels. I can't help but notice that you couldn't bother to specify any of those tools you claim to support high level campaigns like was done earlier when showing the way removal of various subsystems strips tools away from supporting the GM in running high level play with specific examples.

 

[Maxperson]

We were not discussing the ability to run "a" high level campaign. This came up because of how 5e simplifies and streamlines away so many of the subsystems that support the GM in running broader styles of campaign other than low agency one shot string style.. that takes more than "A" high level campaign

How about several consecutive high level campaigns, then? And played in other well done 5e high level campaigns.

As others have pointed out, successful high level play really depends on a solid trek across the lower levels being able to grow a solid foundation for the high level stretch of that campaign. That's a big problem for 5e because the mechanical support for that trek to cover much beyond a pair of rocket boots on rails to off the scale power when previously the GM & players could spend more time working on a wider foundation across those levels. I can't help but notice that you couldn't bother to specify any of those tools you claim to support high level campaigns like was done earlier when showing the way removal of various subsystems strips tools away from supporting the GM in running high level play with specific examples.

Classes, races, magic items, monsters, encounter building charts, spells, artifacts, outer planes, and more. 5e has all the same tools that prior editions had. It just has fewer high level monsters. It works just fine for high level campaigns if you know what you are doing already, just like prior editions also worked just fine if you knew what you were doing.

5e's problem is that it doesn't teach new DMs how to run high level. It gives them the tools, but leaves the instructions for those tools out of the books and then wonders why new DMs are metaphorically cutting off their own limbs and the limbs of their players.

 

[Reynard]

5e's problem is that it doesn't teach new DMs how to run high level. It gives them the tools, but leaves the instructions for those tools out of the books and then wonders why new DMs are metaphorically cutting off their own limbs and the limbs of their players.

I very much agree with this. Maybe we will get a DMG2 for 2024D&D and they can address it.