For what it's worth, the two players in my group that have planned out their characters are also the two MMO players of the group. Not necessarily claiming that as proof of one argument or the other, just presenting it as is.
I've planned characters to level 20 myself before, and each time I always regretted doing so. Once I do it, the process leaves me bored and cold with the character, and I end up wanting to do a different character instead.
Happiest medium I've found was to get an idea of what subclass I might head toward, but unless I must choose it right away I still leave it open-ended. All too often I find that what I had in my mind and what the character ends up after the first few sessions are not always the same. Sometimes the differences build up to the point where I decide a different path is more appropriate.
I usually have more than one character per concept idea anyway, because I like to explore different takes on that concept. For example, both my Inquisitive Rogue and Paladin Oath of the Crown characters came from the same base concept.
Why do some players map out level builds for their characters? Seriously? I have read reputable posts that most campaigns collapse at the Gygax Point (9-13th level). Given that salient detail: why do people plan out 1-20 progressions for their PCs?
Is this actually true? I have played a lot of Tier IV D&D in 5e. It seems to be a lot more playable at the high levels than previous editions. In one game I'm in, characters are even at the point of getting Epic Boons. And besides that, even if we accept it is true that most games collapse at the Gygax Point, some do not. If there's a 30% chance your game will be going well into the higher levels, you may as well build with that in mind. I guess the idea is to work up a concept that will be fun and playable at all levels, not optimized just for low or mid levels.
Indeed it is. Surveys, the majority of published adventures, personal experience, and most of the online chatter I've seen all agree that around level 11 or so is the cut off point for most games.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
ModeratorFor what it's worth, the two players in my group that have planned out their characters are also the two MMO players of the group. Not necessarily claiming that as proof of one argument or the other, just presenting it as is.
I've planned characters to level 20 myself before, and each time I always regretted doing so. Once I do it, the process leaves me bored and cold with the character, and I end up wanting to do a different character instead.
Happiest medium I've found was to get an idea of what subclass I might head toward, but unless I must choose it right away I still leave it open-ended. All too often I find that what I had in my mind and what the character ends up after the first few sessions are not always the same. Sometimes the differences build up to the point where I decide a different path is more appropriate.
I usually have more than one character per concept idea anyway, because I like to explore different takes on that concept. For example, both my Inquisitive Rogue and Paladin Oath of the Crown characters came from the same base concept.
I prefer to let the character development happen as the campaign goes on.
But some prefer to min/max and powerbuild their characters.
while i can self-nerf myself at times, if it makes sense for the character.
Is this actually true? I have played a lot of Tier IV D&D in 5e. It seems to be a lot more playable at the high levels than previous editions. In one game I'm in, characters are even at the point of getting Epic Boons. And besides that, even if we accept it is true that most games collapse at the Gygax Point, some do not. If there's a 30% chance your game will be going well into the higher levels, you may as well build with that in mind. I guess the idea is to work up a concept that will be fun and playable at all levels, not optimized just for low or mid levels.
Crawford and Mearls have indeed stated that their surveys indicated play ended around those levels.
well, i've had 2 groups that fell apart around those levels.
Both cases had a player or two more or less breaking the campaign.
Indeed it is. Surveys, the majority of published adventures, personal experience, and most of the online chatter I've seen all agree that around level 11 or so is the cut off point for most games.