D&D General Why does D&D still have 16th to 20th level?

[jgsugden]

By using an incredible amount of narrative fiat. Superman never beats luthor because he can't kill him, and Luthor always finds a way out of jail.

That doesn't work in most dnd games. The PCs find the bad guy, and immediately kill them....and your story is over. These kind of power imbalance scenarios you see in comics only work because the author forces it to work, when you give players agency these scenarios immediately fall apart.

You're thinking too narrowly. There is a lot more in the spectrum of these stories than you envision.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Agreed. It is still pretty conflicted, even if I try and twist the lens towards anime.

What it is trying to do is engage the promise of the premise.

When people outside of the game hear 'fantasy', they picture warriors with mighty thews wrestling claymation dinosaurs to the ground and throwing their axes through elephants. They picture wizards throwing explosions the size of houses. They expect archers to shield surf like Legolas and shoot twenty orcs with one arrow. They picture EPIC feats and the kind of badassery that can only be expressed via electric guitar.

And... those expectations are being placed on a game born of the idea of sad, grubby adventurers barely eeking out an existence while avoiding fighting, interaction or anything that could be considered baddass on penalty of death and firmly rooted in low fantasy.

So they tried to make a progression from one to the other, but the system for the former doesn't scale to fit with the later. Even with the floor being raised in more recent editions, you still get their weird thing where the big, genre-defining stuff is kept at a trickle, but its very presence is enough to frustrate DMs who have been running the other type of game for 12 level now and have neither been warned nor given reason to expect the PCs are going to suddenly be badass beyond previous expectations... in fits and spurts.

 

[Vaalingrade]

You're thinking too narrowly. There is a lot more in the spectrum of these stories than you envision.

For example, Superman never beats Luthor because Luthor is charismatic, rich and powerful; thus immune to consequences.

 

[Oofta]

In D&D what you describe is for low level and part of mid level. At the upper end of mid level and higher you have wishes, clones, boons, items, contingencies and more to keep BBEGs coming back as repeat villains.

I have a dybuk (based on a CR 4 monster) that comes back now and then to taunt the PCs. The only real modification is that he can use the abilities and original HP of the corpse it's occupying. They've "killed" the host body a few times, but the dybuk dimension doors away and then goes through a wall/floor.

I'm sure at some point they'll kill it off for good, but for now it's fun to see their faces when he greets them with his catch phrase.

 

[Maxperson]

I have a dybuk (based on a CR 4 monster) that comes back now and then to taunt the PCs. The only real modification is that he can use the abilities and original HP of the corpse it's occupying. They've "killed" the host body a few times, but the dybuk dimension doors away and then goes through a wall/floor.

I'm sure at some point they'll kill it off for good, but for now it's fun to see their faces when he greets them with his catch phrase.

That's really cool. For sure there are ways to do it low level. At upper mid and high levels it's much easier is all I'm really saying.

 

[Oofta]

That's really cool. For sure there are ways to do it low level. At upper mid and high levels it's much easier is all I'm really saying.

Absolutely. I was just pointing out that there are many, many ways to have recurring villains in a world with magic.

My only caveat is to not overuse them, and if by luck or smart play they should finish off the recurring villain then they do. Heck, I've had recurring villains recurring across campaigns because the party wasn't able to stop them.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It isn't weird to me - it's the way D&D has always been. And there are two reasons for it - the first is because there are folks who do use those rules and leaving them out would generate bad will. For 5e in particular, the compromise edition where they were trying to make everyone happy, cutting off the game at 12th level and not including 7th-9th level spells would have been outside the remit of trying to make everyone happy.

But the other reason for it is psychological - it isn't that players are going to get to those levels, it's that there's a promise that if they get to those levels then the game has rules for it.

(Also you probably wouldn't be able to cut out the 7th-9th level spells anyway - especially if you're going to keep spellcasting foes in the Monster Manual instead of turning all of the spells monsters can cast into actions as per 4e. Folks generally don't remember that the higher level spells in the game were often put there because they were needed for enemies to cast, and the creators of the game were averse to giving the bad guys special powers that the player characters couldn't theoretically get for themselves.)

As they should be. Making that decision should be carefully and individually considered.

 

[Stalker0]

It's weird that the PHB gives over space to content that is rarely used, just for the sake of tradition.

So there are multiple ways that players interact with the game. There is of course "playing" the game, but there is also "dreaming" the game.

I have definately taken some of my best characters and built them up to 20th level, just to see what they would be like. I've dreamed of some of my characters getting to that level of power, even if they never actually get there in play.

And of course there are NPC elements, having the epic NPC that may serve as a mentor, as the classic world's hero, etc.


So high level rules do serve a purpose beyond just "running high level games". Whether that's "enough" to justify their page count is certainly debatable.

 

[Charlaquin]

That 5e, even with flattened math, less buffs, less magic items, less feats, and less class abilities, runs into the same old problems, makes me wonder if there is any solution to making high level play fun and challenging.

Start out weaker and power up slower? But I don’t think that would necessarily be more fun than sticking with the current progression curve and just stoping at 11th level or so.

 

[Stalker0]

You're thinking too narrowly. There is a lot more in the spectrum of these stories than you envision.

Feel free to enlighten me. There are tons of stories out there...but they work because the author is holding all the cards. The characters work the way the author says they are going to work, and so the plot always turns out the way the author wants.

With dnd its a bit different. As everyone has some creative license in the story, and because players generally like to win, they are going to do things that help them do that. Also, PCs don't really get "tired" in a sane mortal way, which causes a lot of narrative dissonance. While a story character would be bored to tears doing the same thing for 5 minutes straight, a PC cleric will gladly cast guidance every minute of every day if it eeks them out some extra benefits....or until the DM tells them to stop because its silly

 

[Yaarel]

One of the advantages of having five tiers, each with four levels, is focusing one how each tier relates to the world. At the levels 1 to 4 tier, players are part of a village or school. At the 9 to 12 tier they are part of nation building. At 16 to 20, they are altering planets.

The scale of magnitudes increases. Each tier is a different kind of game, from newbies to superheroes.

 

[Stalker0]

One of the advantages of having five tiers, each with for levels, is focusing one how each tier relates to the world. At the levels 1 to 4 tier, players are part of a village or school. At the 9 to 12 tier they are part of nation building. At 16 to 20, they are altering planets.

The scale of magnitudes increases. Each tier is a different kind of game, from newbies to superheroes.

In theory yes, in practice we already have that with 4 tiers but people still confused or just simply don't agree on the definitions.

 

[Yaarel]

.

In theory yes, in practice we already have that with 4 tiers but people still confused or just simply don't agree on the definitions.

Personally, I find the Players Handbook tier schedule useless, because level 10 is nothing like 5. And level 11 is nothing like 15.

But having five separate four-level tiers works great. I can write an adventure for a tier. I know how famous and influential characters are by tier. At tier 9 to 12, they start building an institution, like a wizard school, a fortress, become a political leader, and so on. This is also when they start feeling more like superheroes, so I set super challenges.


A four-level tier is in itself a kind of setting. It makes leveling manageable conceptually, and thematically interesting.

 

[James Gasik]

There are a whole, whole lot of us that play to 20th level. Even if 95% of players don't reach those levels, 5% of 50 million is a huge number.

Go tell that to the guy who thinks we should remove Halflings from the PHB because only 5% of people play them, lol.

 

[Maxperson]

Go tell that to the guy who thinks we should remove Halflings from the PHB because only 5% of people play them, lol.

And halflings are far from the lowest race played, even at 5%.

 

[Minigiant]

In theory yes, in practice we already have that with 4 tiers but people still confused or just simply don't agree on the definitions.

We agree with what the first few tiers are. That's why they get the content.

There still isn't a 50% consensus within the community of what the equivalent of an Archimage Wizard for more than half the classes. So how can you do Tier 4.

Heck. WOTC writes the game and really lack a handle on what half the classes are past level 11.

 

[James Gasik]

We agree with what the first few tiers are. That's why they get the content.

There still isn't a 50% consensus within the community of what the equivalent of an Archimage Wizard for more than half the classes. So how can you do Tier 4.

Heck. WOTC writes the game and really lack a handle on what half the classes are past level 11.

It would be nice if they would make high level campaign books with things like building strongholds and gathering followers again, mass combat, politicians, and bizarre adventures, but historically their attempts in the past were...decidedly mixed bags, and I don't think sold all that well.

In this new era of maximum profits, minimal production, I'm not sure there's a place for that from WotC, and we'll have to figure it our ourselves or buy it from elsewhere.

 

[Minigiant]

It would be nice if they would make high level campaign books with things like building strongholds and gathering followers again, mass combat, politicians, and bizarre adventures, but historically their attempts in the past were...decidedly mixed bags, and I don't think sold all that well.

In this new era of maximum profits, minimal production, I'm not sure there's a place for that from WotC, and we'll have to figure it our ourselves or buy it from elsewhere.

WOTC or any major 3rd party could get a lot of mileage out of exclusive magic spells for half casters and writing 16th+ level class features like epic levels and not as completion of a set of low level features done to prevent frontloading.

People don't even agree that high level characters should be defined by strongholds and followers.

 

[Malmuria]

So there are multiple ways that players interact with the game. There is of course "playing" the game, but there is also "dreaming" the game.

I have definately taken some of my best characters and built them up to 20th level, just to see what they would be like. I've dreamed of some of my characters getting to that level of power, even if they never actually get there in play.

And of course there are NPC elements, having the epic NPC that may serve as a mentor, as the classic world's hero, etc.


So high level rules do serve a purpose beyond just "running high level games". Whether that's "enough" to justify their page count is certainly debatable.

I was certainly this way with 2e when I was little. I remember getting the wizard spell cards and longingly rereading the 9th level ones lol.

If it were up to me, I'd focus the base PHB on gameplay for levels that players actually get to (and where the published adventures usually end), and then have an "advanced" PHB providing more full support for higher level play. Of course, they could do the latter without trimming the former.

 

[Stalker0]

People don't even agree that high level characters should be defined by strongholds and followers.

Yeah the real question is not when characters should stop leveling, the real question is when should a character stop "powering up".

Old Dnd effectively had a strong power progression that than flatlined, sure you gained levels but those levels honestly just didn't mean that much, you get a tiny amount of hitpoints, once in a while some adjustment to your THACO and saving throws, but that was about it. From a power perspective you were done.

But this is highly controversial, people like "more stuff" and "more power".... even though they don't realize that at some point adding more actually makes the game less, because your spending so much time on the mechanics your not actually enjoying the story anymore.