D&D 5E No One Plays High Level?

[Micah Sweet]

I'm not arguing in either direction because I can see the value in both, but this is basically the tension between a curated experience and a verisimilitudinous one. That is to say, should the BBEG(s) have the best combo of powers and minions to make the Final Battle as awesome for the players as possible, or should the BBEGs have the powers and minions that make the most sense in the fiction? (And of course there I'd a continuum between these poles.)

I know which one I'd pick. Villains with perfect knowledge are unfair and boring.

 

[Shardstone]

A slot system is a fascinating idea, and I really think pursuing that line of thought might lead to some interesting ideas.

Int score slots I don't think is good, but I like using Int Mod + PB as a base. And, frankly, I think there needs to be some consideration for included features that don't take up slots. For example, there's no reason that a caster's Spellcasting feature should take up a slot, especially if cantrips and spells will. I also don't think its worth it for racial traits to take up a slot because most racial traits aren't worth anything. If a Lizardfolk's natural weapons has to take up a slot...well, that's not a game I'd personally be interested in playing.

You'd have to look at MOBAs for your model, not MMOs. MOBAs have usually 4 slots for powers + a passive. Sometimes, the 4 slots for powers also are loaded with various passives too, giving more than 4 abilities. I'd say it'd make the most sense for a character to start off with either PB x2 or PB + Int mod at start, and then at 5th, 11th, and 16th level, they get a bonus number of slots.

In order for this kind of system to really shine, you'd probably have to redesign classes. As they are right now, I don't think slot-based design would be that interesting. I could be a mid-level Ranger receiving Wisdom saving throws while the party Wizard is choosing 4th level spell slots. We can argue all day about whether this is equal or not, but it doesn't feel good -- saving throw proficiencies, while useful, don't make fun at the table, just let you have more fun by getting you out of trouble. So, I'd say that any and all proficiencies, including Expertise, should not take up a slot.

Likewise, at higher class levels, this option does nothing for Fighters, barbarians, or monks as they are now. Brutal Critical taking up a slot would feel like a slap in the face, as would Brutal Critical's improvements. Likewise, Timeless Body for a Monk taking up a slot feels likewise pointless. After all, I'm getting Timeless Body and the Cleric gets Earthquake? Mid.

If you were to redesign classes, it'd be wise to look at how MOBAs handle simple vs complex champions and use that to mirror low-level features and high-level features. At low-level, you get features that do usually one thing, and can be used in various ways but remain simple. This would be something like Action Surge, or Pact of the Chain, or Burning Hands. At high level, you'd want a feature to both have an active and a passive component. Maybe a Barbarian gets a Strenght-based feature that when activated lets them throw Large & Huge objects/creatures, and passively lets them grapple these creatures or lift x20 their Strength score at a time.

As for how many slots you end with, we have to think exactly when is it a lot of players have trouble keeping up with their features. Now, anyone whose run a game for new players knows that some people will have trouble with their features forever, and others will take to it like water. But I'd say, once you have 5 different levels of spell slots, and once you have like 15+ spells + class features, you're probably nearing your "mental limit" for how much you're likely to remember at any one given time. With this in mind, I'd say probably around 8 active slots would be good, and then you have 4 things you can maybe use a Bonus Action to swap into your active rotation. This gives you 12 effective abilities and you can tactically play with them, mixing and matching different combinations to achieve different effects.

However, the more I think about it, the more I wonder if it might be better to try this with just a completely different style of game. Maybe having just 5 slots and being able to change them in and out would feel better, and then you'd have a lower level limit, maybe between 1-10 for example.

 

[Reynard]

I know which one I'd pick. Villains with perfect knowledge are unfair and boring.

That wasn't either of the options. The question was between making sure that the PCs have opportunities to shine based on how they built their characters, and an adherence to an underlying logic. "Perfect knowledge" has nothing to do with it.

 

[Autumnal]

it does turn into an Anime sort of game eventually.

Or…mythology. Hercules, Odysseus, Gilgamesh and Enkidu, Arjuna, the Outlaws of the Marsh, the Monster Twins, Hunahpú and Xbalanqué, Circe, Hekate, Brunnhilde, and so many more.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Or…mythology. Hercules, Odysseus, Gilgamesh and Enkidu, Arjuna, the Outlaws of the Marsh, the Monster Twins, Hunahpú and Xbalanqué, Circe, Hekate, Brunnhilde, and so many more.

To be fair to the really ignorant statement, that's pretty much just the Fate series.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The video is pretty much correct on the issues. The matter of bypassing adventures with high level magic has been pretty extensively already debated in the other thread.

I'll also repeat the observation that high level adventures are also conceptually harder to craft. Having run a ton of Exalted, which is designed for this, it still felt more difficult to come up with adventures in the long run (I still did it and liked it.) It is like Batman and Superman. It just starts to some point seem contrived and unrelatable that there always is some new massive super threat to deal with. More mundane stuff happening all the time is way less weird, and it is more relatable to the players.

 

[Minigiant]

A slot system is a fascinating idea, and I really think pursuing that line of thought might lead to some interesting ideas.

Int score slots I don't think is good, but I like using Int Mod + PB as a base. And, frankly, I think there needs to be some consideration for included features that don't take up slots. For example, there's no reason that a caster's Spellcasting feature should take up a slot, especially if cantrips and spells will. I also don't think its worth it for racial traits to take up a slot because most racial traits aren't worth anything. If a Lizardfolk's natural weapons has to take up a slot...well, that's not a game I'd personally be interested in playing.

You'd have to look at MOBAs for your model, not MMOs. MOBAs have usually 4 slots for powers + a passive. Sometimes, the 4 slots for powers also are loaded with various passives too, giving more than 4 abilities. I'd say it'd make the most sense for a character to start off with either PB x2 or PB + Int mod at start, and then at 5th, 11th, and 16th level, they get a bonus number of slots.

In order for this kind of system to really shine, you'd probably have to redesign classes. As they are right now, I don't think slot-based design would be that interesting. I could be a mid-level Ranger receiving Wisdom saving throws while the party Wizard is choosing 4th level spell slots. We can argue all day about whether this is equal or not, but it doesn't feel good -- saving throw proficiencies, while useful, don't make fun at the table, just let you have more fun by getting you out of trouble. So, I'd say that any and all proficiencies, including Expertise, should not take up a slot.

Likewise, at higher class levels, this option does nothing for Fighters, barbarians, or monks as they are now. Brutal Critical taking up a slot would feel like a slap in the face, as would Brutal Critical's improvements. Likewise, Timeless Body for a Monk taking up a slot feels likewise pointless. After all, I'm getting Timeless Body and the Cleric gets Earthquake? Mid.

If you were to redesign classes, it'd be wise to look at how MOBAs handle simple vs complex champions and use that to mirror low-level features and high-level features. At low-level, you get features that do usually one thing, and can be used in various ways but remain simple. This would be something like Action Surge, or Pact of the Chain, or Burning Hands. At high level, you'd want a feature to both have an active and a passive component. Maybe a Barbarian gets a Strenght-based feature that when activated lets them throw Large & Huge objects/creatures, and passively lets them grapple these creatures or lift x20 their Strength score at a time.

As for how many slots you end with, we have to think exactly when is it a lot of players have trouble keeping up with their features. Now, anyone whose run a game for new players knows that some people will have trouble with their features forever, and others will take to it like water. But I'd say, once you have 5 different levels of spell slots, and once you have like 15+ spells + class features, you're probably nearing your "mental limit" for how much you're likely to remember at any one given time. With this in mind, I'd say probably around 8 active slots would be good, and then you have 4 things you can maybe use a Bonus Action to swap into your active rotation. This gives you 12 effective abilities and you can tactically play with them, mixing and matching different combinations to achieve different effects.

However, the more I think about it, the more I wonder if it might be better to try this with just a completely different style of game. Maybe having just 5 slots and being able to change them in and out would feel better, and then you'd have a lower level limit, maybe between 1-10 for example.

It really depends on how many slots you will end at. I believe the best number for active abilities for an action scene is 4-8. The rest being passive or of there pillars.

If your hard cap at 10 or double proficiency mod, then you need to combine some features together to keep most PCs under 8 features.

If you got with INT score or bonus INT mod, you have to fill the slots with more passives to keep under 8 or 9.

We sorta have this system

• Aberrant Dragonmark
• Ability Score Improvement
• Artificer Initiate
• Eldritch Adept
• Fey Touched
• Fighting Initiate
• Gift of the X Dragon
• Knight of Solomnia
• Initiate of High Sorcery
• Magic Initiate
• Martial initiate
• Metamagician Adept
• Shadow Touched
• Skill Expert
• Tough
• (new) Weapon Mastery
• X Armor Master
• X Weapon Master
• X of the Y Giant

Are all about equal in power. They just don't scale. Scaling comes from class. It would be not too difficult to make them automatically scale by upgrading them to half the power of their class and subclass versions. Then do so for other features like Rage and Sneak Attack. Then lock for full scaling to actual class choice as an automatic 3-5 slot choice.

Like Magic Initiate or Fey Touched could let to take higher and higher spells as you level but you lose the cantrip. You can only cast the spell once a day unless you get Spellcasting from your base class.

I think this might have been a hope in 5e but the status of feats being optional and without feat trees forced WOTC to run simple, nonscaling versions.

 

[MNblockhead]

I know which one I'd pick. Villains with perfect knowledge are unfair and boring.

Well sure, but I personally do not have the intelligence and experience of a lich. It can be just as boring to have the lich become a pushover because a harried and unprepared DM doesn't play it to its full potential. I can't speak for other DMs, but for me, personally, being unprepared and unfamiliar with an enemies abilities detracts from verisimilitude.

In terms of how well the enemies understand the PCs abilities, that depends on the intelligence and experience of the enemies. For enemies who are unfamiliar with the PCs, I might have them cast a spell or use an ability that would seem like the best attack not knowing that the PCs have certain protections and resistances, but a long time nemesis, who is very familiar with the PCs, would be far more prepared and its tactics far more optimized.

I don't feel that I have to "pick" either approach. Both approaches will be used throughout the life of a long campaign.

 

[MNblockhead]

The video is pretty much correct on the issues. The matter of bypassing adventures with high level magic has been pretty extensively already debated in the other thread.

I'll also repeat the observation that high level adventures are also conceptually harder to craft. Having run a ton of Exalted, which is designed for this, it still felt more difficult to come up with adventures in the long run (I still did it and liked it.) It is like Batman and Superman. It just starts to some point seem contrived and unrelatable that there always is some new massive super threat to deal with. More mundane stuff happening all the time is way less weird, and it is more relatable to the players.

That's why I like the zero to hero arc. In my current campaign, we used a form of GP for XP and leveling was slow, especially in tiers 2 and 3. At higher levels, when they were able to clear some of the major campaign milestones, I used milestone leveling. The number of sessions played at high levels are far fewer than those played at lower levels. I don't think that would enjoy a long campaign entirely played at Tier 4 levels.

But it really isn't because of story limitations. I think if you really lean into the gonzo elements of high-level play, you can run games with many of the same trops of subterfuge, mystery, epic combats, etc., especially if running to multi-planar campaign. I could enjoy being a player in that kind of campaign, but it would be exhausting for me as DM to run, especially as I would need to write up most everything from scratch.

 

[the Jester]

Has anyone ever found benefit from this old book? (And, more importantly, is its advice of any value today?)

View attachment 328462

I had this back in the day and remember it having a bunch of cool stuff in it, but by the time it came out, 2e was on its last legs and so was TSR. It started becoming hard to find new D&D books about the same time, at least where I was living. When a friend picked up a copy of Players Option: Spells & Magic, we ended up trading. I think I came out ahead, but I wasn't running a super high level group at the time.