Just been reading some of the post around an it seems the everyone(players and dm's)seems to always have problems with high levels games.
So whats the best level/s and why??
Im a low level type of guy, all my fav games have come from starting out at low levels and working our way up.
Between 5-7 is what i like.
|
I like it best from levels 7 or so up to around 13 - the PCs are tough and resourceful, without being overpowering or invulnerable, and I get to design more complex monsters and encounters. For that same reason, I usually start my players at level 2, just to give them a little extra staying power.
High level play is no problem - the only thing that causes me real grief is teleportation, which I'll probably remove completely in my next homebrew. That way, every journey becomes an adventure in itself.
"Better" is a tricky word. And we all know that opinions are like ..., well, you know everybody's got one. Still, you asked for opinions so...
I vote mid-level. What? that's not an option? Oh, okay, low level then. High level play is fine but I'm not the power-hungry type who loves saving the world or destroying it. I like the nitty-gritty, weeklong high from defeating the band of goblins type of play. I like starting out kinda ordinary and wimpy, struggling (and sometimes failing) at just staying alive and encountering largely ordinary obstacles. My favorite levels are between 5-12, more specifically 8-10. You can take on some cool monsters & NPCs without (hopefully) getting totally destroyed but your actions still only impact your little corner of the country and the rest of the world is pretty much oblivious to your existence. Also, as has been noted many many many times on other threads, all the options really can make the game drag at higher levels and some of the best monsters become a bit dull to encounter.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
I like it best from levels 7 or so up to around 13 - the PCs are tough and resourceful, without being overpowering or invulnerable, and I get to design more complex monsters and encounters. For that same reason, I usually start my players at level 2, just to give them a little extra staying power.
High level play is no problem - the only thing that causes me real grief is teleportation, which I'll probably remove completely in my next homebrew. That way, every journey becomes an adventure in itself.
I don't have any real issues with teleportation because you can only teleport to places you are able to get an accurate description of (until you get teleport without error at level 13 [or 14 for sorcerers]... I still call it that, even in 3.5). Even with greater teleport, the caster must still have a clear concept of his destination to get to it, otherwise the spell simply fails. There are so many spells to throw off divination that getting an accurate description of a destination can become nearly impossible. The only thing teleport is really good for in my games is the return trip, which is fine because I hate travel time and random encounters anyway.
My favorite levels are from 8-14. I usually start my games at levels 3 to 5 since I don't particularly enjoy the idea of killing a character with a single shot from a goblin shortbow at level 1. Not only that, but a level 1 wizard can kill another level 1 wizard with a simple magic missile if they don't have one ready to counterspell with or have a shield spell up. I think that's just silly.
|
I tend to like low to low-mid level games the best. This is why I tend to award half the usual experience and treasure for adventures of a particular level. This causes there to be twice as much story between level-ups and by the time the characters reach tenth level, we have been playing the campaign for as long as another group would have for twentieth level. My campaigns tend to reach their completion at around tenth level. I have actually considered breaking the half standard award down to 33%, but have yet to try this.
Tam
I have to say after a long streak of low-level games, my party (and I) found the recent but short time spent in the mid-high levels fun. My longest campaign with my current group had been level 11, they just got into level 14 at the end of our current campaign, and next week we start Age of Worms, so long time down the road, they will taste the truely high level of play, I am sure they will enjoy it.
I wanted to slow levelling progress, and halved my experience awards, but that campaign ended around 6th or 7th level because I had hit a dry well in my imagination for the campaign.
All in all, I have to say I enjoy both, but love working from low to high.
I too have a preference for low-level games. The fights go faster (less options) and I get the feeling that we accomplish more in one session than if the group was at those high levels. In my experience, at those levels (14th or so), we could maybe get one fight or two in one session... It's just too damn long.
Just my opinion, though.
Ultradan
I think it depends on whether you are in a group that has played from low levels together or is it a one-off of higher level pcs? I tend to keep most of my games in the 8-12th level areas, but that seesm to be because I can't keep a game going for longer than that (Army = I move alot). I like the creative solutions lower levels seem to inspire, vice the Force Majeur options open at higher levels. YMMV
|
|
What's Better? High or Low Levels?
On that topic, I would have to answer: yes!
I'm not trying to be flippant (or, at least not any more than I normally am), but I really think the game is what you make it.
Low-levels offer all the branching possibilities that characters might grow into, every round has the possibility of being completely lethal, you're just getting to know your character and those of the other players...
Mid-levels you have more exotic options for yourself, you feel that you're moving along your character's career path, a lot of adventures can seem less "standardized", a wider range of threats can be encountered, combat can still be dicey, but you have a little more cushoning in the HP department.
High-levels your character can really impact the world, and if you are wanting have a sweeping feel to the game, monsters and threats can get highly exotic and there's the thrill of having your characters be the next Beowulf/King Arthur/Conan/Merlin/etc. Plus, if you have 'come up the ranks' from low levels, the sense of history and connection with your character and/or group can be something to cherish.
So every range has something to offer, as long as you have an ass-load of fun, it's the best.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
Plus, if you have 'come up the ranks' from low levels, the sense of history and connection with your character and/or group can be something to cherish.
I couldn't agree more, Gav. I've found that STARTING a character at high levels can often lead to a sense of droning, mindless combat and little excitement but if that same character has a tangible HISTORY to him, suddenly the action is much more alive as you get to make use of your tried-and-true battle manuevers against your enemies and make references to battles you've had in the past. If you're going to do a high-level game, its best to earn it. Jumping there right from the start is really only good for a one-shot game to see how min-maxy you can get with a given concept and just blow things away. Otherwise, it gets old really fast.
Levels 7-16 are my favorite to play. But true satisfaction comes with bringing your character from a rookie to a veteran. I always build my characters to be the weakest in the group, emphasizing more on his diplomacy. But as we gain levels and my character starts to have a bigger impact on party battles and towards the mid teens he is one of if not the party powerhouse.
Basically, its not about the beginning or the end, but the journey in between.
As I'm sure you are implying, which style do we PREFER to play? I play my game like I ride: low. LOL Not really - I drive a bucket, but it sounded cool when I thought it.
Levels 7-16 are my favorite to play. But true satisfaction comes with bringing your character from a rookie to a veteran. I always build my characters to be the weakest in the group, emphasizing more on his diplomacy. But as we gain levels and my character starts to have a bigger impact on party battles and towards the mid teens he is one of if not the party powerhouse.
Basically, its not about the beginning or the end, but the journey in between.
I completely agree. All of my favorite characters were raised from level one. it's more fun, for me, to watch them grow.
It's been said already (and I completely agree) that every "range" has its advantages and disadvantages. But since we're all expressing our opinions, my former group and I's favorite levels were the mid ranges (about 7 to 14), escpecially when worked up to from level 1.
Be safe all.
I run games from 1st level to 60th level and everything in between. If Im running a modual, I prefer 10-15. If I'm running a home grown game, 25-45th.
I love playing at high levels. It makes me sad that so many people shy away from it. Though I will admit that it does take alot more work to run a good high level game.
Just been reading some of the post around an it seems the everyone(players and dm's)seems to always have problems with high levels games.
So whats the best level/s and why??
Im a low level type of guy, all my fav games have come from starting out at low levels and working our way up.
Between 5-7 is what i like.
Bluntly, it actually depends on the group of players. If they "munchkin"/"powergame" [which d20 rather candidly encourages for simple survival], when you hit the teens to near-Epic, let alone Epic, levels of play - odds are, you are running a large number of very short duration encounters. If, on the other hand, they actually Role-play [which d20 does not make, as a general "book" rule, remotely worthwhile to attempt to do] then the likelyhood of such monstrosities of characters wading through everything they do is lessened.
I have fond memories working years of play time to get to "arch" name level (around 17th or so in 1st edition) - and then dual-classing "back" to 1st level. Granted, this is not possible without house rules in 3.5, so ...
Presuming standard rules, I'd have to say that the most fun levels (with a caveat for "no krakens") would be from levels 5 or 6 all the way to about 18th. Epio level play is - bluntly - prone to stupidity past the mid-20 level range. Low level play is a matter of sheer survival. Once the fireballs come on line, however, the party finally starts getting some real firepower (pun not intended) as well as flexibility.
Director of Narrative
|
Although I've only reached 17th with one 3.5e character and before that 14th, I still have to say I like low level play. I truly enjoy 1st - 5th. So much development and growing into your new self. The most amount of change in character seems to happen in that period. Mid and high have these elements themselves, and in some cases the development is greater.
As a DM I think writing good storylines that are not too deadly for a group of firsties is a real challenge. I even think the Dungeon Submission Guidelines mentioned something about them not getting many low low level submissions. My campaigns are pretty gritty and realistic (for a fantasy game) and when you're low level you have to be creative to overcome many of your challenges and even sometimes have to enlist a bit of help, which creates bonds and contacts to help further drive the storyline later.
my duece