D&D 5E No One Plays High Level?

[the Jester]

yeah no guides that TSR or WOTC have ever written for High level play have ever been worth the paper they were on.

I think the best guides for running high level play were in the Paizo era Dungeon Magazine adventures. Lots of "lean into and require high level pc abilities, don't chud them!"

 

[the Jester]

Even spell casters, who did expand their repetoires, did not gain a bunch of weird and strange abilities.

For the record, this depends on what resources you were using and how early the edition was. Unearthed Arcana gave high level druids all kinds of weird powers in 1e and I think they carried over to 2e; the Complete Wizard's Handbook or whatever the brown book was called gave high level specialists special powers in 2e; and specialty priests (also 2e) often gained high level granted powers.

I do agree with the basic point that they had fewer powers gained than modern characters, at least mostly. (Heirophant druids might be the exception.)

 

[Reynard]

For the record, this depends on what resources you were using and how early the edition was. Unearthed Arcana gave high level druids all kinds of weird powers in 1e and I think they carried over to 2e; the Complete Wizard's Handbook or whatever the brown book was called gave high level specialists special powers in 2e; and specialty priests (also 2e) often gained high level granted powers.

I do agree with the basic point that they had fewer powers gained than modern characters, at least mostly. (Heirophant druids might be the exception.)

I called out druids and monks in the post you quoted. They definitely got the toys.

 

[Quickleaf]

Thanks, I'm both excited for the finale and am also looking forward to starting a new campaign.


Don't fall into the more HP trap. Maybe it'll keep some enemies in combat for a round or two extra, but at this level, PCs can deal extreme damage and more HP doesn't do much to make combat more interesting.

For example, say you are fighting Orcus and he uses his wand to summon 500 HP of undead. Rather than one or two undead dragons, it will be much more scary and fun combat to bring in a lot of glass canon undead with a variety of special attacks. Think alips, ghosts, haints, poltergeists, maybe throw in both a demilich and some flame skulls. Which floating head is the demilich? In this example, I actually LOWER the HP of the individual minions so I can bring more of them in. The action economy starts to make things scary, I only allow one arcana check per turn so they are going to have to start combat without knowing what everything is (I don't tell them what the things are, only that they see various spirits and floating skulls). It forces meaningful strategic choices, especially with things that have high mobility, can go ethereal, are incorporeal, melt/hide in shadows, etc.

While I will still use things like banishment, paralysis, etc., I much prefer charm magic, possession, etc. Where the player can still play, against the other players. Having multiple enemies in the battle that can do these things are still scary, even at high levels. A score of ghosts can be more scary than a lich.

You pretty much have to go with high-level magic enemies, traps, and puzzles at this level. Lots of ways to prevent planar travel, teleportation, etc. Also, I don't have a problem with lair effects and protections that a PC couldn't do using RAW. It is fair because PCs (at least in my group) have lots of divination and other resources to learn about what they may be getting into. My players are the type that will spend a crazy amount of time on magical and mundane intel gathering and have a great many resources with which to accomplish this, so I don't feel that I have to pull any punches here. Other groups of players not used to my DMing style, or who find prep boring, might have problems with this.

I probably spend more time than necessary thinking about the cosmological order in my campaign. Not only because I enjoy it and because it helps with adjudicating the wish spell. I'm not great at improvising the wish spell on the spot, so it helps to have some heuristics or a sense of how it would work or not work in my world. This allows me to fairly adjudicate wishes without being arbitrary and puts the power into the players hands to research and divinate on how certain wishes could play out. I keep what they learn somewhat vague so there is still room for surprises, but I've been able to avoid players feeling like they've wasted a wish.

In my current campaign, which is focused on a specific area and is not a planes jumping, universe spanning campaign, it helps to have something that grounds the party to the area and makes them care. I use a homebrew system that mixes rules from Strongholds and Followers, rules for reputations from an old EN5ider article, and a mix of PHP, DMG, and Xanathar's downtime activity. The cleric has started a new religious order, the party has built up their various strongholds into a growing town, and there are various factional politics that can help and hinder the party in meeting their goals.

Also, in this campaign, I take a somewhat adversarial role. Not really in that I want to win, but my bad guys do and I will try to kill the PCs. In low levels, that played out mostly through a sandboxy and deadly environment where incaution could easily lead to death. At high levels, however, it means the bad guys see the PCs as an existential threat and will do anything within their power to take them out. Since they are grounded to the area, have a lot of people and goals they want to protect, and are actually NOT gods and can't be everywhere at once, it makes factional politics much more important and strategically building up troops, followers, and other protections to safeguard their interests and the people they care about.

They have always had the option to just move on to some other area and take the campaign in whatever direction they wanted (I have a crazy amount of Lost Lands material) but they've come to care enough about cleansing Rappan Athuk, bringing civilization to the Forest of Hope, and supporting their allies that they never did.



Yeah, and it often isn't that fun. Often it is getting to the BBEG that is more of a challenge and more fun than the actual final encounter. In a long campaign, not every encounter with a big bad has to be epic. It is cathartic to wipe the floor with bad guys after you finally find and get to them. I've learned to focus on a few set piece, epic battles, and am less worried about every combat being a challenge. It is important to make the exploration and social pillars of play still matter at high levels.


Yeah, I think that is what is needed. A high level adventure should include a lot of advice for GMs on how to adjust the adventure for different play styles and powers. It would make it more wordy, but it would help more DMs get over their anxiety of running high level adventures.

Thanks for sharing some of your experience and adjustments to make high-level play fun for your group. Really like how you homebrewed a stronghold / reputation / downtime hybrid system that works for your group – seems like the kind of homebrew that improves longevity of the game to handle "out of the dungeon" parts of high-level play.

 

[Vaalingrade]

It's not that high level adventures are harder, it's that D&D DMs have been conditioned to not want to design high level adventures that are super open-ended to account for the huge number of options available and the idea that at this point, it's more about the story than traditional challenge.

It's a different type of storytelling that the community ignores because it doesn't fit with the vision of high level stuff that's meant to hyperbolize and malign it.

And it goes back to the latest scare term people use: superhero, and in particular Superman. Outsiders to the genre still see Supes as the 1970's Silver Age version where he's literally juggling planets and saving the day with super basket weaving and that's all the stories are about. That or they're seeing the constant big empty events where the world/universe/multiverse/Venomverse is in danger and think that's the only kind of story you can tell with high powered individuals.

However, those aren't the good superhero stories and not the ones people should be looking to emulate for high level play. The best Superman stories are about his effect on the world; how he inspires others and brings them together. There's a recent story where he takes the day off and everyone in Metropolis pitches in to make sure the city is in good hands without him--including ordinary people and even some villains. Imagine a late stage of an episodic campaign when the characters the PCs helped come back and work together on something for them; something that needs more manpower than just high level spells can solve.

The other best Superman stories are about the emotional impact on the character, especially dealing with problems that can't be punched; addressing personal issues, societal issues, institutional issues. Once the PCs are at a place where they can drop kick a Balor, maybe the normal people around them (heroes need a good supporting cast! Who are your PC's supporting cast?) ask what they're doing for the world at large.

Moving away from Superman, why not pit them against threats they can't fight directly? The X-men traditionally fight to protect a world that hates and fears them. And while this means they fight Sentinels sent by people who hate how they were born, and the Brotherhood, made up of people who are fighting the good fight the wrong way, the ultimate enemy is the hatred held for them by the public and they can't morally beat that out of them.

The Runaways features a sorcerer who can cast Wish at-will (but only once per specific wish), a hardlight entity, and someone wielding an alien war machine meant to take on armadas-- they spend their time cleaning up the petty messes left over from the villains they took down and trying to live a peaceful life. How is that not a seed for an awesome campaign? The fights aren't the challenge, the balance of them with life is.

Or let them have fun. In the 80's you'd have whole sections of X comics would be Mutant Ball episodes where they try to do a sport of activity 'normally' which devolves into them just having fun with their powers. Why not let them run wild and have an adventure where they can cut loose where the challenge is problem solving with Phenomenal Cosmic Power?

TL;DR: The focus of a high power story isn't about the high power. It's about how people deal with that power, what it means to them and the world. It's not about the fights, it's about using those fights to tell a story. And that's a concept that can translate down to the lower levels too. We don't need 8 fights a day to tell a compelling narrative; we can focus on character, theme and implication instead OR alongside.

 

[Shardstone]

It's not that high level adventures are harder, it's that D&D DMs have been conditioned to not want to design high level adventures that are super open-ended to account for the huge number of options available and the idea that at this point, it's more about the story than traditional challenge.

It's a different type of storytelling that the community ignores because it doesn't fit with the vision of high level stuff that's meant to hyperbolize and malign it.

And it goes back to the latest scare term people use: superhero, and in particular Superman. Outsiders to the genre still see Supes as the 1970's Silver Age version where he's literally juggling planets and saving the day with super basket weaving and that's all the stories are about. That or they're seeing the constant big empty events where the world/universe/multiverse/Venomverse is in danger and think that's the only kind of story you can tell with high powered individuals.

However, those aren't the good superhero stories and not the ones people should be looking to emulate for high level play. The best Superman stories are about his effect on the world; how he inspires others and brings them together. There's a recent story where he takes the day off and everyone in Metropolis pitches in to make sure the city is in good hands without him--including ordinary people and even some villains. Imagine a late stage of an episodic campaign when the characters the PCs helped come back and work together on something for them; something that needs more manpower than just high level spells can solve.

The other best Superman stories are about the emotional impact on the character, especially dealing with problems that can't be punched; addressing personal issues, societal issues, institutional issues. Once the PCs are at a place where they can drop kick a Balor, maybe the normal people around them (heroes need a good supporting cast! Who are your PC's supporting cast?) ask what they're doing for the world at large.

Moving away from Superman, why not pit them against threats they can't fight directly? The X-men traditionally fight to protect a world that hates and fears them. And while this means they fight Sentinels sent by people who hate how they were born, and the Brotherhood, made up of people who are fighting the good fight the wrong way, the ultimate enemy is the hatred held for them by the public and they can't morally beat that out of them.

The Runaways features a sorcerer who can cast Wish at-will (but only once per specific wish), a hardlight entity, and someone wielding an alien war machine meant to take on armadas-- they spend their time cleaning up the petty messes left over from the villains they took down and trying to live a peaceful life. How is that not a seed for an awesome campaign? The fights aren't the challenge, the balance of them with life is.

Or let them have fun. In the 80's you'd have whole sections of X comics would be Mutant Ball episodes where they try to do a sport of activity 'normally' which devolves into them just having fun with their powers. Why not let them run wild and have an adventure where they can cut loose where the challenge is problem solving with Phenomenal Cosmic Power?

TL;DR: The focus of a high power story isn't about the high power. It's about how people deal with that power, what it means to them and the world. It's not about the fights, it's about using those fights to tell a story. And that's a concept that can translate down to the lower levels too. We don't need 8 fights a day to tell a compelling narrative; we can focus on character, theme and implication instead OR alongside.

I agree with all of this, every bit of it. And I think a big reason why a lot of people don't catch this vibe is because it's literally just never put to the forefront by first party products, namely WotC. The only adventure that came close to looking at the effects of the players on the world was Witchlight, and that was still a low to mid level adventure.

Imagining a product that caters to this kind of idea gives me a lot of inspiration too. You could have roll tables to inspire you as to how others perceive the players. You could introduce villains and then have a section of "Consequences" that effect the world the longer the villain is active, and that survive the villain when defeated. Honestly, you could use the ideas from Van Richten's Dark Lords and have characters with low CR have super effective plans that force the players to overcome the villain through another means -- and then all the fighting can come from dealing with the most dangerous elements of that plan, ending in a non-fight conflict against said villain.

 

[Demetrios1453]

TL;DR: The focus of a high power story isn't about the high power. It's about how people deal with that power, what it means to them and the world. It's not about the fights, it's about using those fights to tell a story. And that's a concept that can translate down to the lower levels too. We don't need 8 fights a day to tell a compelling narrative; we can focus on character, theme and implication instead OR alongside.

Or... it can be about the high power. Because, sometimes, that's what the players want. Some may say that that's "boring", but, again, sometimes players want exactly that.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Or... it can be about the high power. Because, sometimes, that's what the players want. Some may say that that's "boring", but, again, sometimes players want exactly that.

It can.

But a large portion of the discussion is how difficult people find it to create an adventure matching power for power as if that's the only direction a high level adventure can take.

 

[James Gasik]

For the record, this depends on what resources you were using and how early the edition was. Unearthed Arcana gave high level druids all kinds of weird powers in 1e and I think they carried over to 2e; the Complete Wizard's Handbook or whatever the brown book was called gave high level specialists special powers in 2e; and specialty priests (also 2e) often gained high level granted powers.

I do agree with the basic point that they had fewer powers gained than modern characters, at least mostly. (Heirophant druids might be the exception.)

I'll second the Complete Wizard's Handbook, the Mystic and the Witch get several crazy abilities. But my personal favorites are the Forgotten Realms mythos priests- here's the abilities priests of Mask gain, as an example:

 

[Quickleaf]

It can.

But a large portion of the discussion is how difficult people find it to create an adventure matching power for power as if that's the only direction a high level adventure can take.

I love what you said above about character-driven stories. That IS neglected in this conversation about challenges of high level adventure design.

Of course with D&D it’s often a “why not both?” situation when it comes to narrative & mechanics/power. Like you pointed out.

I’m curious about the published adventure side of things - it’s easier to craft a highly specific character driven story if the GM does it themself because they know these players & characters for a while (probably). But how would you want that handled in a published high-level adventure? Would you want it handled? Or do you reject the premise of high-level published module style (ie short) adventures?