D&D (2024) Will we get 5 tiers of game in 5.5 insted of current 4?

[Bacon Bits]

They should accept that most games end around 13/14th level.

higher level could just be improvements/more usages/more targets of abilities that you gained in first 10/11 levels.

I'm not sure what they should do. I know that I don't like high level play, but I didn't like it in AD&D, either, or 3e. It was fine in 4e mostly, other than HP bloat, but except for HP the math in that edition is a series of parallel lines.

However, there are some people who do like the existing high level play. So do they change higher level play? That will alienate the people who like it now.

And if they do change it, how? WotC has trouble changing D&D too much without losing players. Do they make high levels more like the rest of the game? I'd love that, but I doubt if everyone wants the game to do that. On the other hand, if they doubled down and ramped power up even more, that would satisfy others but wouldn't satisfy me.

So WotC is in a position where high level is broken and difficult to play (for more than a one-shot), but if they change it they're just changing from satisfying one set of players to another set. Should the line be quadradic, linear, or logarithmic? 1 through 12 or so it all looks the same, but how should progression curve going beyond?

And since nobody currently plays at high level, is it worth it? What if they magically develop a perfect system that lets the DM perfectly control the power curve above level 12, and nobody uses it because there are other reasons nobody plays above that level? What then?

 

[Jer]

If they were going to separate tiers of play by proficiency bonus increase they would have done it back when they released 5e. It was the absolute most natural way to do those breakdowns but they chose to not do it that way.

And the reason for that break wasn't the proficiency bonus I suspect - I think it was spell slots. Levels 5-10 gets you up to level 5 spells and no higher - and I think that's the determiner for where that second tier ends and where the next tier starts. At level 11 the full casters get to start casting 6th level spells - and 6th level spells are where the special rules on spellcasting start to come into play. Sorcerers only get to use spell points to buy up to 5th level slots, spell progression is basically one 6+ slot per level from 11-20, etc.

I think that the expectation is that the thing that differentiates "high level play" from "mid level play" is the casters getting access to 6th level spells. That's where a lot of folks feel their games start to change. Getting an extra +1 to proficiency bonus isn't actually enough of a change to the power level to change the feel of the game, but unlocking those higher level spells definitely can be depending on the group.

 

[bedir than]

It is not about cutting levels, it is about getting your (new)class features sooner. Even if some of them might need to be in some "light" mode the first time you get them.

I.E. barbarians capstone of +4 str and +4 con, might be +2 con at 13th level, +2 str at 15th, +2 con 17th and +2 str at 20th.

I was directly replying to someone who said that it was likely they will cut levels

 

[Horwath]

If they were going to separate tiers of play by proficiency bonus increase they would have done it back when they released 5e. It was the absolute most natural way to do those breakdowns but they chose to not do it that way.

And the reason for that break wasn't the proficiency bonus I suspect - I think it was spell slots. Levels 5-10 gets you up to level 5 spells and no higher - and I think that's the determiner for where that second tier ends and where the next tier starts. At level 11 the full casters get to start casting 6th level spells - and 6th level spells are where the special rules on spellcasting start to come into play. Sorcerers only get to use spell points to buy up to 5th level slots, spell progression is basically one 6+ slot per level from 11-20, etc.

I think that the expectation is that the thing that differentiates "high level play" from "mid level play" is the casters getting access to 6th level spells. That's where a lot of folks feel their games start to change. Getting an extra +1 to proficiency bonus isn't actually enough of a change to the power level to change the feel of the game, but unlocking those higher level spells definitely can be depending on the group.

yeah, about mechanics of 6th level spells that are only available to full casters I agree, but 6th level spell really are not that special.
3rd level is a big boost in power and 5th level spells. 7th level spells are bigger jump from 6th that 6th level are from 5th level.
So, yeah, new tier should be at 3rd level spells, 5th level spells, 7th level spells
and finally 9th level spells.

 

[Helldritch]

They will not cut level. They will however improve low level play.
I do believe the fighter chassi will be battlemaster by default then choose among champion or eldritch knight and maybe cavalier or rune knight. Other classes will adjusted accordingly.

 

[tetrasodium]

Cutting levels would destroy the desired compatibility.
Considering the PHB is still one of the best selling books in the world compatibility isn't just a desire, it's a business requirement. Wizards won't be making massive changes. There's no need. Tabletop D&D is still growing

It would actually improve compatibility to a degree with the power of PCs dropping from 11 on the dial to something a little more sane. Something would need to be done pretty significantly with casters & spells though since they would be getting less and more importantly casters don't improve notably with magic weapons & would get a double kneecapping

 

[Mind of tempest]

They will not cut level. They will however improve low level play.
I do believe the fighter chassi will be battlemaster by default then choose among champion or eldritch knight and maybe cavalier or rune knight. Other classes will adjusted accordingly.

we would be so lucky, that will never happen as fighters must be weak or wizards will have to grow up and admit they are not living gods or unliving if they ascent to lichdom.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I don't think so. Tiers are pretty much just thought experiments anyway, ways for people to classify certain level for the sake of it... but there's nothing that the "four tiers" actually do. Yes, we can describe 5th level (IE the start of Tier 2) as the "level you get the really good stuff! Extra attack! 3rd level spells!"... but so what? Neither of those things really does anything so outrageous or out there from the stuff a character has gotten before, or will be getting later. So "Tier 2" is not anything different from Tier 1, and Tier 3 and 4 the same way. Thus making a 5th Tier doesn't do anything other than allow people like us to shorthand level blocks when we talk here on EN World. Heck, you could remove the Tier designation entirely and it wouldn't change the game in any meaningful way either I don't believe.

As far as moving abilities up or down level... sure WotC could, but I don't see any real net gain.

 

[Micah Sweet]

it is more likely they just cut high levels completely as they have no idea what to do with them.

But WotC has never known what to do with them, and they're still there. What benefit comes from removing them at this point?

 

[Umbran]

They should accept that most games end around 13/14th level.

Given that they have almost no adventure support above that point, it would seem they do recognize it.

That said, I'm happy for the higher levels to still be there.