Well then, even 4e cannot be all bad right? So maybe aspects of 4e should be considered as well. I have not played 4e at all since it has had largely terrible reviews, but I will now have to check out the 4e fighters.
Was it the fighters build that was better, or the game mechanics/combat system that allowed them to be more potent?
I would love to hear more on this and if others agree or disagree.
Well then, even 4e cannot be all bad right? So maybe aspects of 4e should be considered as well. I have not played 4e at all since it has had largely terrible reviews, but I will now have to check out the 4e fighters.
Was it the fighters build that was better, or the game mechanics/combat system that allowed them to be more potent?
I would love to hear more on this and if others agree or disagree.
Thanks,
In 4e it was a blessing and a curse. The power curve was pretty flat going from one class to another, which was nice. The down side is, it made all the classes feel pretty similar. Everyone had different powers that all had similar effects, just with different names. It homogenized the game in the name of making everyone roughly equal, power-wise. It ended up getting a bit boring.
There were other issues, but that seems like the relevant one here.
As for the subclass discussion, I think the main point is not that subclasses are not a viable answer to a lot of these concerns, but that there should also be a viable path for someone to put all there levels in any one base class, whether fighter, wizard, cleric, etc... and have that be just as powerful.
I will repeat what I said earlier. There is no "subclass" going on here - EVERY fighter has to pick an archetype at 3rd level. It isn't multiclassing, they continue to gain levels in only fighter.
The choice of archetype gives the fighter different abilities at various levels as they progress through the Fighter class; and some of these have choices, so that even two fighters with the same archetype can be quite different by the time they reach higher levels.
Thanks for the clarification Farling,
So really it seems like the subclass discussion was a bit of a misunderstanding more than anything else. Archetypes make sense to me as a reasonable way to buff a fighter as they progress. In 3.x there were prestige classes, which I assume would be a "subclass" now if that exists as an option. Prestige classes were a separate and distinct class of there own, which you had to qualify for first, and then the prestige class would usually have up to 5 to 10 possible level advancements before maxing it out. Multiclassing was first introduced in 2nd edition, and I understand it has been brought back in 5e, but it operates a little differently (better in 5e I think).
In my opinion, all of these are great options that I would love to see in 1D&D. I am also open to new and different ways to make the game more exciting and flexible for the PC's to enjoy.
So I think unless anyone else has anything to add that we can put a pin in the subclass discussion, and get back to the meat and potatoes of the thread.
Should fighters be improved somehow in later levels relative to other classes in 1D&D, or is the game already balanced enough? My opinion with limited 5e knowledge is that a little power increase to fighters may be in order, to make them more enjoyable long term.
Here is one reason: Say a party of 3, each playing a different base class.
Wizard Cleric Fighter
The game is played long term and levels are 15+. The PC's playing a wizard, and a cleric, are starting to get access to some really powerful spells, which may make the game exciting for them. The PC playing the fighter gets a little bit better in combat, which is cool, but is it enough to really keep there interest in playing this character into epic levels? For some, yes, for some no. I think fighters need a little more power and versatility as they get into these higher levels. Otherwise, I think for many (not for all) the fighter will become boring and they will want to stop playing and start a new game, which sucks for everyone else who wants to keep playing. Conversely, if the PC sucks it up so that everyone else is happy, then they are just a little bored of their character, which sucks for them.
The PC playing the fighter gets a little bit better in combat, which is cool, but is it enough to really keep there interest in playing this character into epic levels? For some, yes, for some no.
Thoughts?
I think the last bit is what matters. For some, yes, for some, no. Not every class will appeal to every player, and that will be the case no matter what. When we know there are some who like fighters just fine already, why are we re-designing them to appeal to everyone? Presumably, those who don't like fighters will play some other class they do like.
Beyond that to your level 15 question few games go beyond level 12 or so anymore. But I realize that's not the point. Either way, fighters get some really strong powers. They get more attacks than anyone in the game, and the only way to do that without magic is to get to level 11 in fighter. They can just decide to heal themselves. No magic, just force of will and they get hit points back. They can just decide to double the number of attacks they get. They can just decide to give themselves a second chance at a failed saving throw. They get more feats than anyone else, which means they have either higher ability scores, or more choices in combat, or both. And that's just the base fighter, no subclass abilities. Those are all pretty strong abilities. They're not flashy, but they are very strong.
Like I said upthread, what they're really missing is out of combat options, but they can get those through numerous subclasses that give some extra skill proficiencies, or a background choice, if that's what the player wants. Most of the people who complain about fighters haven't actually played one, they just look at it and decide they're not cool. And that's fair, but because they're not cool for you doesn't make them objectively not cool. It just means they're not to your taste.
One thing I will say is that the fighter archetypes are subclasses. Subclass may have meant something different in earlier editions but “subclass”, as a term used in 5E, encompasses all the different classes. Fighters have martial archetypes, clerics have domains, druids have circles, etc. And when you go to the homebrew section and you want to create a fighter martial archetype you go under Subclasses. So the terms are used interchangeably even though technically Farling is correct that fighters have archetypes.
dang. That's heartbreaking that few games go above level 12.
I mean, in the 80's most people generally played 5 to 9 level because at that time that's what all the fun modules were for.
There was no level cap in 1e or 2e.
Getting a character to level 15 back in the day was considered a near superhuman feat by many, and I have always tried to run campaigns that are able to accomodate super high level characters. My standard Campaign design habits always set things up for folks to reach that milestone.
of course, "basic" or "plain" D&D at the time also had the immortals stuff, where characters could ascend to godhood and there were a lot of those -- and basic had a level cap of 20 or 25 or maybe 30, something like that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
As for the subclass discussion, I think the main point is not that subclasses are not a viable answer to a lot of these concerns, but that there should also be a viable path for someone to put all there levels in any one base class, whether fighter, wizard, cleric, etc... and have that be just as powerful.
I will repeat what I said earlier. There is no "subclass" going on here - EVERY fighter has to pick an archetype at 3rd level. It isn't multiclassing, they continue to gain levels in only fighter.
The choice of archetype gives the fighter different abilities at various levels as they progress through the Fighter class; and some of these have choices, so that even two fighters with the same archetype can be quite different by the time they reach higher levels.
Thanks for the clarification Farling,
So really it seems like the subclass discussion was a bit of a misunderstanding more than anything else. Archetypes make sense to me as a reasonable way to buff a fighter as they progress. In 3.x there were prestige classes, which I assume would be a "subclass" now if that exists as an option. Prestige classes were a separate and distinct class of there own, which you had to qualify for first, and then the prestige class would usually have up to 5 to 10 possible level advancements before maxing it out. Multiclassing was first introduced in 2nd edition, and I understand it has been brought back in 5e, but it operates a little differently (better in 5e I think).
In my opinion, all of these are great options that I would love to see in 1D&D. I am also open to new and different ways to make the game more exciting and flexible for the PC's to enjoy.
So I think unless anyone else has anything to add that we can put a pin in the subclass discussion, and get back to the meat and potatoes of the thread.
Should fighters be improved somehow in later levels relative to other classes in 1D&D, or is the game already balanced enough? My opinion with limited 5e knowledge is that a little power increase to fighters may be in order, to make them more enjoyable long term.
Here is one reason: Say a party of 3, each playing a different base class.
Wizard Cleric Fighter
The game is played long term and levels are 15+. The PC's playing a wizard, and a cleric, are starting to get access to some really powerful spells, which may make the game exciting for them. The PC playing the fighter gets a little bit better in combat, which is cool, but is it enough to really keep there interest in playing this character into epic levels? For some, yes, for some no. I think fighters need a little more power and versatility as they get into these higher levels. Otherwise, I think for many (not for all) the fighter will become boring and they will want to stop playing and start a new game, which sucks for everyone else who wants to keep playing. Conversely, if the PC sucks it up so that everyone else is happy, then they are just a little bored of their character, which sucks for them.
Thoughts?
To your point I do believe 1D&D is heading in the direction you are looking for. At least as far as we know now. I do think Fighters, as a base class, is pretty good. And the martial archetypes (subclass) are the better way to boost them. Look at wizards. Yes they get better more powerful spells but as a base class spells is all they get. Their Arcane tradition gives them some abilities but they seem to be more minor than a fighter’s archetype features because of the spellcasting being so powerful.
So it’s kind of, wizards strong base class, weak subclass. Fighters decent base class, strong subclass.
Could they have more? Sure. I hope 1D&D lives up to what’s been implied so far.
Hmm. I think a 5e 20th level fighter vs a 20th level wizard is far more fair than any previous edition. While I agree that they 20th level wizard has a slight edge that edge drops pretty quick based on initiative.
Where the wizard excels is area effect and variety. The fighter on the other hand is single point damage, AC, and hit points. A decent built fight that gets initiative has a pretty good chance of trashing the wizard in one or two rounds. A wizards that gets initiative could take out the fighter in one round but their attacks are generally save based which means if the fighter makes the save the wizard goes back to being a skewered meat stick.
I think the biggest things that fighters lack is flair. The other classes all seem to have a more epic feeling high level ability. All TV at fighters have is tve ability to deal more damage. The truth however is that 2x action surge, 3x indomitable, and 4 base attacks is pretty impressive.
It just doesn't have pizzazz.
Pizzazz can be added with epic boons and magic items.
It seems like the general consensus is that the balance in 5e is greatly improved over prior editions already, which is great to hear. Further, it sounds like this trend will continue improving along with the simplicity of the class information layout, and archetypes to choose from within a fighter class as an option. If this all holds true for 1D&D as we have discussed here, then I think I am going to like 1D&D quite a bit.
That said, I do still hope they find a way to make levels beyond 20 more exciting. I know that most games don't go that long, but I think a big part of that is because the modules have not generally been made for epic levels. So DM's have to either adjust a module or create a homebrew campaign. Further, epic games are generally more complex and difficult to plan and run, especially since the PC's can actually do a lot of incredible things at that point, which makes it more challenging for a DM to create encounters that are a good match.
When I saw that Descent into Avernus was for levels 1 to 13, my initial reaction was to think that was too low. I generally think of Archdevil's as epic level threats. I suppose Avernus being the first layer doesn't need to be too bad so long as PC's can stay clear of the Blood War though. Personally, I would love it if they made another module that delved deeper into Baator for epic level characters. (FYI, I have not read nor played DiA yet, so just talking about my initial impression here)
Long story short: - A lot of great feedback above. - I like what I am hearing about changes for fighters from 3.x to 5e and what seems to be on the horizon for 1D&D. - Hoping epic levels are improved upon and modules are made for them to actually give people a better chance to enjoy them more easily. - Lastly, going back to page 2 of this thread, we discussed new magic weapon possibilities, and I think there are a lot of fun options there to consider, and it sounds like there are some things in the works for 1D&D.
It seems like the general consensus is that the balance in 5e is greatly improved over prior editions already, which is great to hear. Further, it sounds like this trend will continue improving along with the simplicity of the class information layout, and archetypes to choose from within a fighter class as an option. If this all holds true for 1D&D as we have discussed here, then I think I am going to like 1D&D quite a bit.
That said, I do still hope they find a way to make levels beyond 20 more exciting. I know that most games don't go that long, but I think a big part of that is because the modules have not generally been made for epic levels. So DM's have to either adjust a module or create a homebrew campaign. Further, epic games are generally more complex and difficult to plan and run, especially since the PC's can actually do a lot of incredible things at that point, which makes it more challenging for a DM to create encounters that are a good match.
When I saw that Descent into Avernus was for levels 1 to 13, my initial reaction was to think that was too low. I generally think of Archdevil's as epic level threats. I suppose Avernus being the first layer doesn't need to be too bad so long as PC's can stay clear of the Blood War though. Personally, I would love it if they made another module that delved deeper into Baator for epic level characters. (FYI, I have not read nor played DiA yet, so just talking about my initial impression here)
Long story short: - A lot of great feedback above. - I like what I am hearing about changes for fighters from 3.x to 5e and what seems to be on the horizon for 1D&D. - Hoping epic levels are improved upon and modules are made for them to actually give people a better chance to enjoy them more easily. - Lastly, going back to page 2 of this thread, we discussed new magic weapon possibilities, and I think there are a lot of fun options there to consider, and it sounds like there are some things in the works for 1D&D.
Let me know what you think.
Thanks again,
You keep mentioning epic levels but as far as I know 5E has no epic levels. I might be missing something but pretty much level 20 is the cap. Hence, no modules for post 20 play as it doesn’t exist. Anything beyond 20 is purely up the the DM with “Epic level boons” as the only thing that is offered for post 20 play (I don’t know if this is from the DMG or other book). And from what I’ve seen, the Epic boons are not that epic.
I assume WotC will do nothing for Epic levels (1D&D is using Epic Boon feats at level 20 to replace the class capstone ability and moving the 5E class capstone ability to level 18) or if they do it will be many many years down the road.
I am encouraged by what I’ve seen so far in the 1D&D play test, much I like and some I don’t like. But that’s what the surveys are for.
It seems like the general consensus is that the balance in 5e is greatly improved over prior editions already, which is great to hear. Further, it sounds like this trend will continue improving along with the simplicity of the class information layout, and archetypes to choose from within a fighter class as an option. If this all holds true for 1D&D as we have discussed here, then I think I am going to like 1D&D quite a bit.
That said, I do still hope they find a way to make levels beyond 20 more exciting. I know that most games don't go that long, but I think a big part of that is because the modules have not generally been made for epic levels. So DM's have to either adjust a module or create a homebrew campaign. Further, epic games are generally more complex and difficult to plan and run, especially since the PC's can actually do a lot of incredible things at that point, which makes it more challenging for a DM to create encounters that are a good match.
When I saw that Descent into Avernus was for levels 1 to 13, my initial reaction was to think that was too low. I generally think of Archdevil's as epic level threats. I suppose Avernus being the first layer doesn't need to be too bad so long as PC's can stay clear of the Blood War though. Personally, I would love it if they made another module that delved deeper into Baator for epic level characters. (FYI, I have not read nor played DiA yet, so just talking about my initial impression here)
Long story short: - A lot of great feedback above. - I like what I am hearing about changes for fighters from 3.x to 5e and what seems to be on the horizon for 1D&D. - Hoping epic levels are improved upon and modules are made for them to actually give people a better chance to enjoy them more easily. - Lastly, going back to page 2 of this thread, we discussed new magic weapon possibilities, and I think there are a lot of fun options there to consider, and it sounds like there are some things in the works for 1D&D.
Let me know what you think.
Thanks again,
You keep mentioning epic levels but as far as I know 5E has no epic levels. I might be missing something but pretty much level 20 is the cap. Hence, no modules for post 20 play as it doesn’t exist. Anything beyond 20 is purely up the the DM with “Epic level boons” as the only thing that is offered for post 20 play (I don’t know if this is from the DMG or other book). And from what I’ve seen, the Epic boons are not that epic.
I assume WotC will do nothing for Epic levels (1D&D is using Epic Boon feats at level 20 to replace the class capstone ability and moving the 5E class capstone ability to level 18) or if they do it will be many many years down the road.
I am encouraged by what I’ve seen so far in the 1D&D play test, much I like and some I don’t like. But that’s what the surveys are for.
Yes, that is my understanding now. When I say that I hope epic levels improve, what I mean is I hope they do more for them than simply the "Epic level boons". Personally, I think they should expand the games capabilities to include epic levels, as it is a limiting factor that will frustrate some people like myself. Homebrew is simple enough when playing table top, but for online play when trying to utilize the software tools that WotC provides, I am concerned that it may be a bit more challenging to homebrew epic levels if the software does not account for this and facilitate it.
Lastly, I do understand that they don't have modules for epic levels as they don't really exist yet. What I was expressing, is that if they do expand the game to include epic levels, then I think more people would play them if they also created epic level modules. It seems unfair to me to say that people don't play epic levels as much when to my knowledge very few, if any, epic modules have ever been created for D&D. I understand that this is a position that can be argued as each edition is different and epic levels have not existed in most of the editions, but instead of looking for exceptions or technicalities to this point, just look at the big picture of what I am saying here. I believe it is generally an accurate statement, as people will gravitate towards levels where material such as modules, etc... exist.
That said, I also like most of what I am hearing for 1D&D as well, and even if they do not improve/create epic levels and modules for them, I still am very much looking forward to its release.
I think it is more the case that over the history of D&D, players tend to stop campaigns in the level 10-15 range maximum because the power level of the characters is just crazy. Thus they decided in 5E not to bother creating campaigns which go anywhere near level 20 - and WOTC put in epic boons purely to provide something to people who like to play stupidly powerful characters.
I think it is more the case that over the history of D&D, players tend to stop campaigns in the level 10-15 range maximum because the power level of the characters is just crazy. Thus they decided in 5E not to bother creating campaigns which go anywhere near level 20 - and WOTC put in epic boons purely to provide something to people who like to play stupidly powerful characters.
I agree to some extent, but I have to ask the question, why is that the general trend?
Is it because the players typically lose interest, or is it like I said earlier, because it is more challenging to plan and run a campaign for a group of epic level adventurers. Likely to some extent it is both of these, but to what degree I could not say for sure. My experience makes me think that it may be more the latter though. Either way, if there are a lot of players that would enjoy playing characters into these levels, but they simply don't because very few DMs want to run a homebrew epic level campaign and there aren't any epic level modules to run, then we really can't say that people don't want to play epic level campaigns. In other words, there may not be enough info available to correctly assess this.
WotC has probably conducted surveys about this like crazy, so you may be correct here, but w/o that info I don't think we can really answer that question ourselves.
In my years and games, about a quarter ever really wanted to go and do the giant games, but they were tired of the whole “fight a god” model. They wanted something new. A story that wasn’t ascension or kill Sauron. They wanted something interesting, and that gave them a sense of real heroism, and gave them a chance to become legend.
Which means finding a story that does that. In 5e, a single 20th level fighter can generally grind through a swarm of 100 goblins pretty easily by himself. A wizard can level a city even without using things like wish. A Druid can pretty much bring the mountain to him, lol. And honestly, I can see why a lot of DMs do the whole fight a god or become a god thing. It is a comparatively easy story, well known.
for 20th level and above, in my new setting, I have two areas set aside. One is essentially an above ground dungeon exploration in a place where everything is trying to kill you, even the air you breathe. Superman storylines are useful here — take away his power and what is he, as long as he can get it all back in time to save the day. But the dangers in that place would all but outright kill anything under 12th level.
The other place is why the encounters with Dragons are so rare on this planet. They have reached the pinnacle, defeated the Ikon of Belial and his horde of devil servants, set back the clock by centuries of the god’s return. But they haven’t faced more than three dragons, and never once in the form of a dragon.
There will be dragons. The Sphinxes and Chimerae, the Centaurs and strange saurian type things — they are only heard about, mentioned in passing, and not covered in the lord the players get. yet they are there, in an area nearly as large as the Empire, and now that the big bad is gone, they feel it is time to show themselves, and attack the rest of the world as punishment.
naturally, this is when the most powerful characters in 300 years are needed, lol. Up to them. And that is the secret 21st adventure in my new campaign: a challenge the involves things they don’t know anything about, haven’t fought, have powers and abilities that truly rival theirs, and that shatter the norms they have gotten useful. Even my usual bit of advance lore has intentionally obscured it because I have maxed out all the classes just to see what is possible so I can counter it.
by the time they get to it, they will have done the dungeons part. Now they have to do the dragons part, and I have made it so that a single dragon is to a lvl 20 what a beholder is to a lvl 3. Death walking, seemingly impossible to kill, able to pretty much one shot a character.
because that is one thing that is missing: things powerful and potent enough.
after that, however, it is time to retire. None of them are expected to get out of it unscathed, if they win. And at least a few will have had a romance cycle as part of the long campaign to get there. So now they get to make grand children, who will have a whole different world to grow up in — one changed and affected and I will tell stories of what they all did afterwards and those will go into the second lore book.
But the whole point of this long bit is that people would like to do it, but it has been done to death in the same few ways. The old Lolth module was incredible, but it was kill the goddess. That was only to 14 or 15.
the 2e module Dancing hut of baba Yaga went to 20. Labyrinth of madness was 15 and above, Castle Greyhawk was up to 25th, The Apocalypse Stone, A. Paladin in Hell — I think that was all the 15 to 20’s for 1e and 2e. Only one went above and it was a dungeon crawl akin to tomb of horrors.
I stopped buying any modules after 3e came out, so there might have been a dozen then, especially in the 3.5e era, but they also realized like 60 modules.
So I think it is a combination of not knowing how to create an adventure of that sort, especially one that is homebrew as most games are.
but also, the stories for a character stop. The book ends. Time for a new one. And for most folks, around 12 to 15 is when that story stops.
this is why I started at the beginning to make a full campaign, to weave a story — stories, really — that would last that long. It needed a big huge final battle with stakes unlike anything else, and then it will need a big “return to normal”, a happily ever after codicil.
and then the next generation starts in with their own adventures
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
In my years and games, about a quarter ever really wanted to go and do the giant games, but they were tired of the whole “fight a god” model. They wanted something new. A story that wasn’t ascension or kill Sauron. They wanted something interesting, and that gave them a sense of real heroism, and gave them a chance to become legend.
Which means finding a story that does that. In 5e, a single 20th level fighter can generally grind through a swarm of 100 goblins pretty easily by himself. A wizard can level a city even without using things like wish. A Druid can pretty much bring the mountain to him, lol. And honestly, I can see why a lot of DMs do the whole fight a god or become a god thing. It is a comparatively easy story, well known.
for 20th level and above, in my new setting, I have two areas set aside. One is essentially an above ground dungeon exploration in a place where everything is trying to kill you, even the air you breathe. Superman storylines are useful here — take away his power and what is he, as long as he can get it all back in time to save the day. But the dangers in that place would all but outright kill anything under 12th level.
The other place is why the encounters with Dragons are so rare on this planet. They have reached the pinnacle, defeated the Ikon of Belial and his horde of devil servants, set back the clock by centuries of the god’s return. But they haven’t faced more than three dragons, and never once in the form of a dragon.
There will be dragons. The Sphinxes and Chimerae, the Centaurs and strange saurian type things — they are only heard about, mentioned in passing, and not covered in the lord the players get. yet they are there, in an area nearly as large as the Empire, and now that the big bad is gone, they feel it is time to show themselves, and attack the rest of the world as punishment.
naturally, this is when the most powerful characters in 300 years are needed, lol. Up to them. And that is the secret 21st adventure in my new campaign: a challenge the involves things they don’t know anything about, haven’t fought, have powers and abilities that truly rival theirs, and that shatter the norms they have gotten useful. Even my usual bit of advance lore has intentionally obscured it because I have maxed out all the classes just to see what is possible so I can counter it.
by the time they get to it, they will have done the dungeons part. Now they have to do the dragons part, and I have made it so that a single dragon is to a lvl 20 what a beholder is to a lvl 3. Death walking, seemingly impossible to kill, able to pretty much one shot a character.
because that is one thing that is missing: things powerful and potent enough.
after that, however, it is time to retire. None of them are expected to get out of it unscathed, if they win. And at least a few will have had a romance cycle as part of the long campaign to get there. So now they get to make grand children, who will have a whole different world to grow up in — one changed and affected and I will tell stories of what they all did afterwards and those will go into the second lore book.
But the whole point of this long bit is that people would like to do it, but it has been done to death in the same few ways. The old Lolth module was incredible, but it was kill the goddess. That was only to 14 or 15.
the 2e module Dancing hut of baba Yaga went to 20. Labyrinth of madness was 15 and above, Castle Greyhawk was up to 25th, The Apocalypse Stone, A. Paladin in Hell — I think that was all the 15 to 20’s for 1e and 2e. Only one went above and it was a dungeon crawl akin to tomb of horrors.
I stopped buying any modules after 3e came out, so there might have been a dozen then, especially in the 3.5e era, but they also realized like 60 modules.
So I think it is a combination of not knowing how to create an adventure of that sort, especially one that is homebrew as most games are.
but also, the stories for a character stop. The book ends. Time for a new one. And for most folks, around 12 to 15 is when that story stops.
this is why I started at the beginning to make a full campaign, to weave a story — stories, really — that would last that long. It needed a big huge final battle with stakes unlike anything else, and then it will need a big “return to normal”, a happily ever after codicil.
and then the next generation starts in with their own adventures
A lot of great info here, and a solid assessment.
I think you are correct that the fighting/becoming a god thing has been done a lot, and I have two thoughts to express on that.
First, there are always new players that haven't done it yet, and it wouldn't hurt to put something out like this, even if it is just a recreation of an old module just to keep things fresh (I am not familiar with all of 5e's modules yet, so for all I know this may have already been done, in which case kudos).
Second, if they were to create new epic level modules, I agree that it would be great to have a different plot line, and I understand that that is not an easy thing to do. I think you are right on track when you talk about having the environment itself killing lesser folk. In my opinion, any module/campaign of this scope should be more than just a BBEG, it should have a grand scheme of plot twists and multiple layers of evil at work all twisting and turning amongst each other, and the players should be caught in the middle trying to sort things out.
Anyway, I may be an odd man out on this one, but a guy can dream right?
I think the bottom line is that creating epic modules/campaigns is challenging and time consuming, so perhaps monetarily speaking it does not make sense for WotC to spend the time needed to create them either. I still think they need to make epic levels an integrated part of the game though (yup, that's my opinion and I'm sticking with it!)
There’s a bit of chicken or the egg to it, so people not play them because they’re not around, or do companies not make them because they’re not wanted. Personally, I trust hasbro’s market research and if there was a big demand for high level content, they provide it. Even these anthology books they’ve made, where it’s just, basically, a bunch of one-shots, only go up to level 13 or 14. It would be pretty low commitment to add in a single, level 19 adventure into one of those books, but they don’t bother.
But there’s also some practical aspects. It’s really hard to maintain an interesting, coherent narrative for that long (1-20). You start needing to remember NPC’s from 32 sessions ago, plot details from over a year ago (a year in real time not game time), it just gets unwieldy. Sure there’s tables that can do it, but it takes a skilled DM and at least one or two players who are really invested in the world. What’s more, as a player, you keep seeing new books published, and new stuff you want to try. It’s going to take many, if not most, groups a few years to go 1-20. By then, there’s been a few new sourcebooks, and setting books, and you want to play a different character. As fun as one might be, there’s always a new one around the corner that looks super cool.
In my years and games, about a quarter ever really wanted to go and do the giant games, but they were tired of the whole “fight a god” model. They wanted something new. A story that wasn’t ascension or kill Sauron. They wanted something interesting, and that gave them a sense of real heroism, and gave them a chance to become legend.
Which means finding a story that does that. In 5e, a single 20th level fighter can generally grind through a swarm of 100 goblins pretty easily by himself. A wizard can level a city even without using things like wish. A Druid can pretty much bring the mountain to him, lol. And honestly, I can see why a lot of DMs do the whole fight a god or become a god thing. It is a comparatively easy story, well known.
for 20th level and above, in my new setting, I have two areas set aside. One is essentially an above ground dungeon exploration in a place where everything is trying to kill you, even the air you breathe. Superman storylines are useful here — take away his power and what is he, as long as he can get it all back in time to save the day. But the dangers in that place would all but outright kill anything under 12th level.
The other place is why the encounters with Dragons are so rare on this planet. They have reached the pinnacle, defeated the Ikon of Belial and his horde of devil servants, set back the clock by centuries of the god’s return. But they haven’t faced more than three dragons, and never once in the form of a dragon.
There will be dragons. The Sphinxes and Chimerae, the Centaurs and strange saurian type things — they are only heard about, mentioned in passing, and not covered in the lord the players get. yet they are there, in an area nearly as large as the Empire, and now that the big bad is gone, they feel it is time to show themselves, and attack the rest of the world as punishment.
naturally, this is when the most powerful characters in 300 years are needed, lol. Up to them. And that is the secret 21st adventure in my new campaign: a challenge the involves things they don’t know anything about, haven’t fought, have powers and abilities that truly rival theirs, and that shatter the norms they have gotten useful. Even my usual bit of advance lore has intentionally obscured it because I have maxed out all the classes just to see what is possible so I can counter it.
by the time they get to it, they will have done the dungeons part. Now they have to do the dragons part, and I have made it so that a single dragon is to a lvl 20 what a beholder is to a lvl 3. Death walking, seemingly impossible to kill, able to pretty much one shot a character.
because that is one thing that is missing: things powerful and potent enough.
after that, however, it is time to retire. None of them are expected to get out of it unscathed, if they win. And at least a few will have had a romance cycle as part of the long campaign to get there. So now they get to make grand children, who will have a whole different world to grow up in — one changed and affected and I will tell stories of what they all did afterwards and those will go into the second lore book.
But the whole point of this long bit is that people would like to do it, but it has been done to death in the same few ways. The old Lolth module was incredible, but it was kill the goddess. That was only to 14 or 15.
the 2e module Dancing hut of baba Yaga went to 20. Labyrinth of madness was 15 and above, Castle Greyhawk was up to 25th, The Apocalypse Stone, A. Paladin in Hell — I think that was all the 15 to 20’s for 1e and 2e. Only one went above and it was a dungeon crawl akin to tomb of horrors.
I stopped buying any modules after 3e came out, so there might have been a dozen then, especially in the 3.5e era, but they also realized like 60 modules.
So I think it is a combination of not knowing how to create an adventure of that sort, especially one that is homebrew as most games are.
but also, the stories for a character stop. The book ends. Time for a new one. And for most folks, around 12 to 15 is when that story stops.
this is why I started at the beginning to make a full campaign, to weave a story — stories, really — that would last that long. It needed a big huge final battle with stakes unlike anything else, and then it will need a big “return to normal”, a happily ever after codicil.
and then the next generation starts in with their own adventures
When I played AD&D we did the Lolth module (I think back then she had 66 HP, but she could cast heal on herself which restored all but 1d4 HP, iirc) and we had an Archer (Fighter) in the group that had Weapon Specialization from the Unearthed Arcana book (it's the one that introduced the Barbarian, Cavalier and Thief Acrobat, I believe). We were all excited for a major battle and on round one the archer used their boots of levitation (they were hasted too) to rise up, fire a bunch of arrows (from the weapon specialization rules) and took Lolth out in one round. Cool, but anticlimactic. And I think things like this are why there are no epic modules. You don't know and can't plan for what a group might have, including all the magic items they may have acquired, to really balance a module at these levels.
Thanks Dekachan_Desu,
Well then, even 4e cannot be all bad right? So maybe aspects of 4e should be considered as well. I have not played 4e at all since it has had largely terrible reviews, but I will now have to check out the 4e fighters.
Was it the fighters build that was better, or the game mechanics/combat system that allowed them to be more potent?
I would love to hear more on this and if others agree or disagree.
Thanks,
In 4e it was a blessing and a curse. The power curve was pretty flat going from one class to another, which was nice. The down side is, it made all the classes feel pretty similar. Everyone had different powers that all had similar effects, just with different names. It homogenized the game in the name of making everyone roughly equal, power-wise. It ended up getting a bit boring.
There were other issues, but that seems like the relevant one here.
Thanks for the clarification Farling,
So really it seems like the subclass discussion was a bit of a misunderstanding more than anything else. Archetypes make sense to me as a reasonable way to buff a fighter as they progress. In 3.x there were prestige classes, which I assume would be a "subclass" now if that exists as an option. Prestige classes were a separate and distinct class of there own, which you had to qualify for first, and then the prestige class would usually have up to 5 to 10 possible level advancements before maxing it out. Multiclassing was first introduced in 2nd edition, and I understand it has been brought back in 5e, but it operates a little differently (better in 5e I think).
In my opinion, all of these are great options that I would love to see in 1D&D. I am also open to new and different ways to make the game more exciting and flexible for the PC's to enjoy.
So I think unless anyone else has anything to add that we can put a pin in the subclass discussion, and get back to the meat and potatoes of the thread.
Should fighters be improved somehow in later levels relative to other classes in 1D&D, or is the game already balanced enough? My opinion with limited 5e knowledge is that a little power increase to fighters may be in order, to make them more enjoyable long term.
Here is one reason: Say a party of 3, each playing a different base class.
Wizard
Cleric
Fighter
The game is played long term and levels are 15+. The PC's playing a wizard, and a cleric, are starting to get access to some really powerful spells, which may make the game exciting for them. The PC playing the fighter gets a little bit better in combat, which is cool, but is it enough to really keep there interest in playing this character into epic levels? For some, yes, for some no. I think fighters need a little more power and versatility as they get into these higher levels. Otherwise, I think for many (not for all) the fighter will become boring and they will want to stop playing and start a new game, which sucks for everyone else who wants to keep playing. Conversely, if the PC sucks it up so that everyone else is happy, then they are just a little bored of their character, which sucks for them.
Thoughts?
D&D 5th Edition is balanced enough; does not need to be any more complicated than it appears.
What folks seem to really desire is an ultimate edition that clarifies the rules simplified, organized and comprehensively.
I think the last bit is what matters. For some, yes, for some, no. Not every class will appeal to every player, and that will be the case no matter what. When we know there are some who like fighters just fine already, why are we re-designing them to appeal to everyone? Presumably, those who don't like fighters will play some other class they do like.
Beyond that to your level 15 question few games go beyond level 12 or so anymore. But I realize that's not the point. Either way, fighters get some really strong powers. They get more attacks than anyone in the game, and the only way to do that without magic is to get to level 11 in fighter. They can just decide to heal themselves. No magic, just force of will and they get hit points back. They can just decide to double the number of attacks they get. They can just decide to give themselves a second chance at a failed saving throw. They get more feats than anyone else, which means they have either higher ability scores, or more choices in combat, or both. And that's just the base fighter, no subclass abilities. Those are all pretty strong abilities. They're not flashy, but they are very strong.
Like I said upthread, what they're really missing is out of combat options, but they can get those through numerous subclasses that give some extra skill proficiencies, or a background choice, if that's what the player wants. Most of the people who complain about fighters haven't actually played one, they just look at it and decide they're not cool. And that's fair, but because they're not cool for you doesn't make them objectively not cool. It just means they're not to your taste.
One thing I will say is that the fighter archetypes are subclasses. Subclass may have meant something different in earlier editions but “subclass”, as a term used in 5E, encompasses all the different classes. Fighters have martial archetypes, clerics have domains, druids have circles, etc. And when you go to the homebrew section and you want to create a fighter martial archetype you go under Subclasses. So the terms are used interchangeably even though technically Farling is correct that fighters have archetypes.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
dang. That's heartbreaking that few games go above level 12.
I mean, in the 80's most people generally played 5 to 9 level because at that time that's what all the fun modules were for.
There was no level cap in 1e or 2e.
Getting a character to level 15 back in the day was considered a near superhuman feat by many, and I have always tried to run campaigns that are able to accomodate super high level characters. My standard Campaign design habits always set things up for folks to reach that milestone.
of course, "basic" or "plain" D&D at the time also had the immortals stuff, where characters could ascend to godhood and there were a lot of those -- and basic had a level cap of 20 or 25 or maybe 30, something like that.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
To your point I do believe 1D&D is heading in the direction you are looking for. At least as far as we know now. I do think Fighters, as a base class, is pretty good. And the martial archetypes (subclass) are the better way to boost them. Look at wizards. Yes they get better more powerful spells but as a base class spells is all they get. Their Arcane tradition gives them some abilities but they seem to be more minor than a fighter’s archetype features because of the spellcasting being so powerful.
So it’s kind of, wizards strong base class, weak subclass. Fighters decent base class, strong subclass.
Could they have more? Sure. I hope 1D&D lives up to what’s been implied so far.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Hmm. I think a 5e 20th level fighter vs a 20th level wizard is far more fair than any previous edition. While I agree that they 20th level wizard has a slight edge that edge drops pretty quick based on initiative.
Where the wizard excels is area effect and variety. The fighter on the other hand is single point damage, AC, and hit points. A decent built fight that gets initiative has a pretty good chance of trashing the wizard in one or two rounds. A wizards that gets initiative could take out the fighter in one round but their attacks are generally save based which means if the fighter makes the save the wizard goes back to being a skewered meat stick.
I think the biggest things that fighters lack is flair. The other classes all seem to have a more epic feeling high level ability. All TV at fighters have is tve ability to deal more damage. The truth however is that 2x action surge, 3x indomitable, and 4 base attacks is pretty impressive.
It just doesn't have pizzazz.
Pizzazz can be added with epic boons and magic items.
Wow, a lot of great posts came in yesterday!
Thank you all for your thoughts and feedback.
It seems like the general consensus is that the balance in 5e is greatly improved over prior editions already, which is great to hear. Further, it sounds like this trend will continue improving along with the simplicity of the class information layout, and archetypes to choose from within a fighter class as an option. If this all holds true for 1D&D as we have discussed here, then I think I am going to like 1D&D quite a bit.
That said, I do still hope they find a way to make levels beyond 20 more exciting. I know that most games don't go that long, but I think a big part of that is because the modules have not generally been made for epic levels. So DM's have to either adjust a module or create a homebrew campaign. Further, epic games are generally more complex and difficult to plan and run, especially since the PC's can actually do a lot of incredible things at that point, which makes it more challenging for a DM to create encounters that are a good match.
When I saw that Descent into Avernus was for levels 1 to 13, my initial reaction was to think that was too low. I generally think of Archdevil's as epic level threats. I suppose Avernus being the first layer doesn't need to be too bad so long as PC's can stay clear of the Blood War though. Personally, I would love it if they made another module that delved deeper into Baator for epic level characters. (FYI, I have not read nor played DiA yet, so just talking about my initial impression here)
Long story short:
- A lot of great feedback above.
- I like what I am hearing about changes for fighters from 3.x to 5e and what seems to be on the horizon for 1D&D.
- Hoping epic levels are improved upon and modules are made for them to actually give people a better chance to enjoy them more easily.
- Lastly, going back to page 2 of this thread, we discussed new magic weapon possibilities, and I think there are a lot of fun options there to consider, and it sounds like there are some things in the works for 1D&D.
Let me know what you think.
Thanks again,
You know, you might just be on to something here.
Maybe that is what bugs me so much is that lack of pizzazz.
Good mention there KidThunderbolt.
Thanks,
Well, if you want pizzazz, let me introduce you to the echo knight, rune knight and psi warrior. All of them get some pretty flashy toys to play with.
You keep mentioning epic levels but as far as I know 5E has no epic levels. I might be missing something but pretty much level 20 is the cap. Hence, no modules for post 20 play as it doesn’t exist. Anything beyond 20 is purely up the the DM with “Epic level boons” as the only thing that is offered for post 20 play (I don’t know if this is from the DMG or other book). And from what I’ve seen, the Epic boons are not that epic.
I assume WotC will do nothing for Epic levels (1D&D is using Epic Boon feats at level 20 to replace the class capstone ability and moving the 5E class capstone ability to level 18) or if they do it will be many many years down the road.
I am encouraged by what I’ve seen so far in the 1D&D play test, much I like and some I don’t like. But that’s what the surveys are for.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Yes, that is my understanding now. When I say that I hope epic levels improve, what I mean is I hope they do more for them than simply the "Epic level boons". Personally, I think they should expand the games capabilities to include epic levels, as it is a limiting factor that will frustrate some people like myself. Homebrew is simple enough when playing table top, but for online play when trying to utilize the software tools that WotC provides, I am concerned that it may be a bit more challenging to homebrew epic levels if the software does not account for this and facilitate it.
Lastly, I do understand that they don't have modules for epic levels as they don't really exist yet. What I was expressing, is that if they do expand the game to include epic levels, then I think more people would play them if they also created epic level modules. It seems unfair to me to say that people don't play epic levels as much when to my knowledge very few, if any, epic modules have ever been created for D&D. I understand that this is a position that can be argued as each edition is different and epic levels have not existed in most of the editions, but instead of looking for exceptions or technicalities to this point, just look at the big picture of what I am saying here. I believe it is generally an accurate statement, as people will gravitate towards levels where material such as modules, etc... exist.
That said, I also like most of what I am hearing for 1D&D as well, and even if they do not improve/create epic levels and modules for them, I still am very much looking forward to its release.
Thanks,
I think it is more the case that over the history of D&D, players tend to stop campaigns in the level 10-15 range maximum because the power level of the characters is just crazy. Thus they decided in 5E not to bother creating campaigns which go anywhere near level 20 - and WOTC put in epic boons purely to provide something to people who like to play stupidly powerful characters.
I agree to some extent, but I have to ask the question, why is that the general trend?
Is it because the players typically lose interest, or is it like I said earlier, because it is more challenging to plan and run a campaign for a group of epic level adventurers. Likely to some extent it is both of these, but to what degree I could not say for sure. My experience makes me think that it may be more the latter though. Either way, if there are a lot of players that would enjoy playing characters into these levels, but they simply don't because very few DMs want to run a homebrew epic level campaign and there aren't any epic level modules to run, then we really can't say that people don't want to play epic level campaigns. In other words, there may not be enough info available to correctly assess this.
WotC has probably conducted surveys about this like crazy, so you may be correct here, but w/o that info I don't think we can really answer that question ourselves.
Thanks,
In my years and games, about a quarter ever really wanted to go and do the giant games, but they were tired of the whole “fight a god” model. They wanted something new. A story that wasn’t ascension or kill Sauron. They wanted something interesting, and that gave them a sense of real heroism, and gave them a chance to become legend.
Which means finding a story that does that. In 5e, a single 20th level fighter can generally grind through a swarm of 100 goblins pretty easily by himself. A wizard can level a city even without using things like wish. A Druid can pretty much bring the mountain to him, lol. And honestly, I can see why a lot of DMs do the whole fight a god or become a god thing. It is a comparatively easy story, well known.
for 20th level and above, in my new setting, I have two areas set aside. One is essentially an above ground dungeon exploration in a place where everything is trying to kill you, even the air you breathe. Superman storylines are useful here — take away his power and what is he, as long as he can get it all back in time to save the day. But the dangers in that place would all but outright kill anything under 12th level.
The other place is why the encounters with Dragons are so rare on this planet. They have reached the pinnacle, defeated the Ikon of Belial and his horde of devil servants, set back the clock by centuries of the god’s return. But they haven’t faced more than three dragons, and never once in the form of a dragon.
There will be dragons. The Sphinxes and Chimerae, the Centaurs and strange saurian type things — they are only heard about, mentioned in passing, and not covered in the lord the players get. yet they are there, in an area nearly as large as the Empire, and now that the big bad is gone, they feel it is time to show themselves, and attack the rest of the world as punishment.
naturally, this is when the most powerful characters in 300 years are needed, lol. Up to them. And that is the secret 21st adventure in my new campaign: a challenge the involves things they don’t know anything about, haven’t fought, have powers and abilities that truly rival theirs, and that shatter the norms they have gotten useful. Even my usual bit of advance lore has intentionally obscured it because I have maxed out all the classes just to see what is possible so I can counter it.
by the time they get to it, they will have done the dungeons part. Now they have to do the dragons part, and I have made it so that a single dragon is to a lvl 20 what a beholder is to a lvl 3. Death walking, seemingly impossible to kill, able to pretty much one shot a character.
because that is one thing that is missing: things powerful and potent enough.
after that, however, it is time to retire. None of them are expected to get out of it unscathed, if they win. And at least a few will have had a romance cycle as part of the long campaign to get there. So now they get to make grand children, who will have a whole different world to grow up in — one changed and affected and I will tell stories of what they all did afterwards and those will go into the second lore book.
But the whole point of this long bit is that people would like to do it, but it has been done to death in the same few ways. The old Lolth module was incredible, but it was kill the goddess. That was only to 14 or 15.
the 2e module Dancing hut of baba Yaga went to 20. Labyrinth of madness was 15 and above, Castle Greyhawk was up to 25th, The Apocalypse Stone, A. Paladin in Hell — I think that was all the 15 to 20’s for 1e and 2e. Only one went above and it was a dungeon crawl akin to tomb of horrors.
I stopped buying any modules after 3e came out, so there might have been a dozen then, especially in the 3.5e era, but they also realized like 60 modules.
So I think it is a combination of not knowing how to create an adventure of that sort, especially one that is homebrew as most games are.
but also, the stories for a character stop. The book ends. Time for a new one. And for most folks, around 12 to 15 is when that story stops.
this is why I started at the beginning to make a full campaign, to weave a story — stories, really — that would last that long. It needed a big huge final battle with stakes unlike anything else, and then it will need a big “return to normal”, a happily ever after codicil.
and then the next generation starts in with their own adventures
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
A lot of great info here, and a solid assessment.
I think you are correct that the fighting/becoming a god thing has been done a lot, and I have two thoughts to express on that.
First, there are always new players that haven't done it yet, and it wouldn't hurt to put something out like this, even if it is just a recreation of an old module just to keep things fresh (I am not familiar with all of 5e's modules yet, so for all I know this may have already been done, in which case kudos).
Second, if they were to create new epic level modules, I agree that it would be great to have a different plot line, and I understand that that is not an easy thing to do. I think you are right on track when you talk about having the environment itself killing lesser folk. In my opinion, any module/campaign of this scope should be more than just a BBEG, it should have a grand scheme of plot twists and multiple layers of evil at work all twisting and turning amongst each other, and the players should be caught in the middle trying to sort things out.
Anyway, I may be an odd man out on this one, but a guy can dream right?
I think the bottom line is that creating epic modules/campaigns is challenging and time consuming, so perhaps monetarily speaking it does not make sense for WotC to spend the time needed to create them either. I still think they need to make epic levels an integrated part of the game though (yup, that's my opinion and I'm sticking with it!)
Thanks all,
There’s a bit of chicken or the egg to it, so people not play them because they’re not around, or do companies not make them because they’re not wanted. Personally, I trust hasbro’s market research and if there was a big demand for high level content, they provide it. Even these anthology books they’ve made, where it’s just, basically, a bunch of one-shots, only go up to level 13 or 14. It would be pretty low commitment to add in a single, level 19 adventure into one of those books, but they don’t bother.
But there’s also some practical aspects. It’s really hard to maintain an interesting, coherent narrative for that long (1-20). You start needing to remember NPC’s from 32 sessions ago, plot details from over a year ago (a year in real time not game time), it just gets unwieldy. Sure there’s tables that can do it, but it takes a skilled DM and at least one or two players who are really invested in the world.
What’s more, as a player, you keep seeing new books published, and new stuff you want to try. It’s going to take many, if not most, groups a few years to go 1-20. By then, there’s been a few new sourcebooks, and setting books, and you want to play a different character. As fun as one might be, there’s always a new one around the corner that looks super cool.
When I played AD&D we did the Lolth module (I think back then she had 66 HP, but she could cast heal on herself which restored all but 1d4 HP, iirc) and we had an Archer (Fighter) in the group that had Weapon Specialization from the Unearthed Arcana book (it's the one that introduced the Barbarian, Cavalier and Thief Acrobat, I believe). We were all excited for a major battle and on round one the archer used their boots of levitation (they were hasted too) to rise up, fire a bunch of arrows (from the weapon specialization rules) and took Lolth out in one round. Cool, but anticlimactic. And I think things like this are why there are no epic modules. You don't know and can't plan for what a group might have, including all the magic items they may have acquired, to really balance a module at these levels.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?