What's with the obsession with "High Level" D&D?

[FatR]

It totally, totally does. Just about every pre-D&D fantasy story treats magic as a vaguely defined McGuffin that the bad guy uses, whereas the good guys are low-level schmucks who win by breaking the McGuffin. PCs just don't get ultra-powerful McGuffins (with fatal Achilles heels), and that's a good thing.

You saw my brief list of fantasy books on the page 2? Two of the examples there were written well before DnD. Another before DnD was a big deal.

Moreover, if you want to exclude settings with "vaguely defined" magic from comparison, DnD goes the fuck out, because it never had any workable definitions of what magic should do or can't do, so we can only infer its capabilities from shit that actually gets done, like, well, in any setting with vaguely degined magic. And also shit that actually gets done in the same world changes between editions, sometimes drastically. Like, how polymorphing yourself suddenly went from a stupid idea to the best way to buff between 2E and 3E, or how availability and ease of creation of magic items suddenly radically changed in the same transition. That's why power level of DnD is better measured by what you're expected to fight, that remains somewhat more consistent.

"Epic" is not shooting the exhaust hole of the Death Star. "Epic" is having your own Death Star. Or are you seriously claiming that shit like "Jade Empire" or "Willow" is your idea of a high level D&D story (in which Frank will laugh you off the face of the planet)?

Never watched Willow, but Jade Empire is a great idea for beginning-high-level D&D story. Your oppose bad guys who are hardcore enough to steal power of a god, you and your buddies asskick a whole army with golems and magic and shit closer to the end, you save (or doom) the world and take over fantasy China as an emperor. Somewhat small-time for level 20th, but perfectly viable for 14-15th, in my mind. And certainly far fucking more impressive in terms of scale and consequences than nearly any of actual DnD stories, except for some books from Dragon Lance metaplot.

[hogarth]

It totally, totally does. Just about every pre-D&D fantasy story treats magic as a vaguely defined McGuffin that the bad guy uses, whereas the good guys are low-level schmucks who win by breaking the McGuffin. PCs just don't get ultra-powerful McGuffins (with fatal Achilles heels), and that's a good thing.

You saw my brief list of fantasy books on the page 2? Two of the examples there were written well before DnD. Another before DnD was a big deal.

I admit I haven't heard of most of those examples. "The Maze of Maâl Dweb" is a variant, in the sense that the good guy is a low-level schmuck who doesn't win by breaking the McGuffin. And most of the Elric stories are perfect examples of winning through breaking McGuffins -- "Oh no, an unbeatable monster, oh wait, I'll use my magic sword and/or one of my unbeatable monster buddies".

Moreover, if you want to exclude settings with "vaguely defined" magic from comparison, DnD goes the fuck out [..]

What I mean is that in most stories powerful magic hardly does anything, other than give you an army of minions. Mostly the "epic" wizard just sits there doing nothing except throwing wave after wave of cannon fodder against you. I guess sometimes they're puzzle monsters too, in which case they're trivially killed by pouring a bucket of water on them or whatever.

Say what you like about D&D wizards, but "just sit there" isn't usually the typical high-level wizard approach to problem solving. (Maybe it is in your game.)

Never watched Willow, but Jade Empire is a great idea for beginning-high-level D&D story.

It depends what you mean. If you mean "high level D&D means you can kill a whole bunch of enemies with punching/stabbing/pew-pew lasers", then I agree with you, and you should be relatively happy with 4E. But other folks think high-level play means all kinds of cosmic Galactus bullshit.

[FatR]

I admit I haven't heard of most of those examples. "The Maze of Maâl Dweb" is a variant, in the sense that the good guy is a low-level schmuck who doesn't win by breaking the McGuffin.

Actually Maal Dweb is a protagonist in at least one story. He gives himself a handicap there (leaving his christmas tree worth of magic amulets at home), to ensure some challenge.

And most of the Elric stories are perfect examples of winning through breaking McGuffins -- "Oh no, an unbeatable monster, oh wait, I'll use my magic sword and/or one of my unbeatable monster buddies".

And how the fuck this is "breaking McGuffins" any more than "I gate a Solar here and then will use my Metamagic Rod of Quicken to help me destroy everyone"?

Well, to be honest, Stormbringer is an artifact and Elric cannot reproduce it himself. But summoning monsters and making pacts with gods is his own power.

What I mean is that in most stories powerful magic hardly does anything, other than give you an army of minions.

That's not even true in Lord of the Rings, where magic has numerous practical applications, even if low-key ones. In swords and sorcery we have astral projections and body snatching, destroying an army with an earthquake, being unkillable save for a weakness to a specific artifact, wards of automatic fuck you that cannot be bypassed without treachery from inside, effective death curses, magic tentacle murder, and that's far from all. I give you, that pre-DnD fantasy magicians generally had no blasting, but this doesn't mean they weren't capable of impressive feats. At least as far as original authors are concerned. Sure thing, hacks that wrote, say, the gazillion sequel stories about Conan often subscribed to the school of thought you describe, but who cares about them, really?

Say what you like about D&D wizards, but "just sit there" isn't usually the typical high-level wizard approach to problem solving. (Maybe it is in your game.)

It usually is in D&D books, though (because they are written by the same breed of hacks). You really have no argument here. Although I'm not sure what it is even supposed to be.

It depends what you mean. If you mean "high level D&D means you can kill a whole bunch of enemies with punching/stabbing/pew-pew lasers", then I agree with you, and you should be relatively happy with 4E. But other folks think high-level play means all kinds of cosmic Galactus bullshit.

False dichotomy is false. Both its part also are completely invalid on their own. Agreeing that high level DnD mostly means that you can kill people harder and kill more impressive people (because, surprise, combat is most of the system) does not mean that anyone can be happy with 4E, because its flaws mostly are orthogonal to violence or threat of violence being the most common way to solve major problems in DnD. And so far everyone who seems to think that high-level play means cosmic superhero level (where, I remind you, lots of dudes can murder planets without too much effort and every threat warranting a crisis crossover is gunning for the entire universe at the very least) have "shaped like itself" arguments, where high-level play is defined by having traits of DnD 3.X high-level play. And then there is use of stuff that is commonly recognized as exploits. I mean, Tippyverse is a fairly fun mental exercise, but it is not how people usually imagine or play DnD.

[Chamomile]

Therefore, in systems that use the 'all powers are possible until the moment you define them' mechanic are extremely sketchy to extrapolate any kind of power level from breadth, especially if it's canon that some characters have a wider range of powers than others.

And I still don't know what you're talking about, because literally every time I have talked about Dragonball Z I have said that it was a high-level story based almost solely on the ability of the protagonists to blow up planets accidentally.

Green Lantern can't raise the dead or shapeshift or read minds, but he can flat-out murder practically everyone in Faerun without them even realizing what's going on.

Yeah, but he can't apply that power on any smaller scale. If he wants to contain the damage to just one kingdom, he can't. If he wants to spare civilians or a certain faction, he can't. If he wants to take on a beholder without nuking the city it lives under, he's in for a Hell of a fight, because he will have to actually crawl into the sewers and find the damn thing, and then fight it at close range without the benefit of a colony drop.

The killsat space-nuking isn't enough to make Green Lantern high-level on its own, anymore than slapping a "can kill everyone within a hundred-mile radius, no-save" ability onto the core Fighter somewhere around level 16 would suddenly make him a high-level character. An attack that is of no utility to anyone who is not an omnicidal maniac doesn't actually make you useful in high-level stories.

And any definition of high-level (setting or story) which includes the Arthurian mythos just because God hypothetically can exercise absurd amounts of power in those stories is obviously not a valid definition.

[virgil]

Gaiman's Sandman?

[Krusk]

Cham - In the most recent (new52) green lantern comic, sinestro has the ring and is being the green lantern. He makes limited copies of the ring and gives it to people to go fight with. He also rails on Hal for being lame with the ring and only making giant fists when there is so much more he could do.

At this point people have thrown out over a dozen cosmic tier characters from fiction and none of them are good enough examples for you for some variety of too obscure/I haven't heard of them/I didn't read that.

We hit the point where we need a list of acceptable things to pick from. We can't keep throwing out examples only to have you say "Dr. Strange is too obscure". (Also WTF, he has an animated movie out, and a live action one in the works) Previously you mentioned batman, spiderman, and X-men as the only comics that count to which I'd have to point you to the phoenix force, jean gray.

[Chamomile]

The existence of one or two high-level super heroes does not mean that most super heroes are high level, and that is the claim that was originally made, and it is flat-out wrong. When you say "most super heroes are high-level" it is not at all unreasonable to bring up the fact that ninety percent of super heroes are not high level, and if you have to go scraping up Sentry to provide counter-examples you've basically just proven my point.

Also, it really doesn't matter if the obscure and specific comic book released was in the 1960s or last Tuesday, so long as it isn't part of what people think of when you say "Green Lantern" it doesn't really qualify. Even if this ends up being a huge turning point for the way Green Lantern is portrayed and he actually does become a high-level character later on, that hasn't happened yet and the fact that it theoretically could doesn't mean anything. Spider-Man had an arc where it turned out the source of his powers was magic instead of a radioactive spider bite, and he had a brief stint as the host for one or the other of the cosmic powers kicking around the Marvel universe, but neither of those brief flirtations with high-level potential actually means that people are going to think of a high-level character when you say "Spider-Man."

[BearsAreBrown]

Wait, your point is that "most super heroes aren't high level?" Well that's a dumb point and I don't think anyone is disagreeing. Yeah, I may I used the phrase but you called me out on it and I clarified. Are you really going to goal post so hard to say that was your point from the beginning?

Most superheroes are not high level. BUT 10% OF THEM ARE. And you can't just wave that away by saying, "oh I haven't heard of him therefore he doesn't count." The world doesn't revolve around your ignorance.

I understand what you mean about Spider-Man not classically having magic powers. No one is claiming that. I am claiming that Hal Jordan's Green Lantern, Flash, Martian Manhunter, Scarlet Witch, Dr Strange, Sentry, Hulk, etc. are classically considered high level supers. As are all the anime examples you ignored.

[ishy]

How do you actually know what is obscure and not and what people generally think about anyway? I for example know virtually nothing about the star wars setting nor do I know anything about green latern other than that it is about a guy with a magic ring or something.

I know I know less about many of those settings than well most people, but why would that even matter? As long as you know you can pick up a certain setting or comic book or whatever and get some good inspiration?

[Chamomile]

Wait, your point is that "most super heroes aren't high level?" Well that's a dumb point and I don't think anyone is disagreeing. Yeah, I may I used the phrase but you called me out on it and I clarified. Are you really going to goal post so hard to say that was your point from the beginning?

The vast majority are not high-level, and the ones that are or can be are frequently and inexplicably depowered to much lower levels anyway.

Superman can beat practically anything because he is arbitrarily strong, arbitrarily durable, arbitrarily fast, and his weakness is very setting specific. Technically that's a high-level concept by my definition, but it's not a very good one.

I didn't change tunes. I have mentioned that my only point was that the vast majority of super heroes are not high level every time we have mentioned super heroes in this thread. That is not goal posting, that is you having a reading comprehension problem.

And I guess you have also forgotten the point of this discussion, which is about a dearth of high-level material in the source material. So no, it doesn't matter that Green Lantern could hypothetically be the star of a high-level story, because he isn't. It doesn't matter that the Hulk is theoretically infinitely strong, because he spends his time doing very much mid-level things. It doesn't matter that Scarlet Witch is (sometimes) high-level, because she's never the protagonist of an actual high-level story, she's just the catalyst for a mid-level one.

I haven't seen One Piece, it's wikipedia entry doesn't peg it as any higher level than Pirates of the Caribbean, though obviously it's pretty damn broad, so if you want me to believe you when you say these things are high-level you should probably actually explain them, because so far you've completely ballsed up about nine out of ten of your examples, which only reinforces the point that the source material very, very rarely covers anything remotely similar to high-level D&D. If you recall, the discussion was triggered by this comment from Krusk:

I assume when someone complains about the source material not supporting something, they mean "Peter Jacksons Lord ofthe Rings movies".

To that extent, i agree. High level dnd does not support aragorn, legolas, gimli or frodo.

Which means my point, from the very beginning, has only been that high-level source material is vanishingly rare and that his assumption is stupid. There really is a dearth of high level material in the source.

[virgil]

There are enough well-known high-level stories that regularly show/use capabilities that would count as high level.

• Star Trek: Ignore Q, just think about what the people on the Enterprise do in comparison to normal fantasy, while much of it seems somewhat low-level only because everyone else has high-level counters of their own
• Sandman: A massively popular comic series, awards all over the place, and is about the life and times of a personification that has immense influence in his setting
• Lucifer: A spin-off from the Sandman universe, it certainly has high-level powers and plots about them
• Doctor Who: While the disparity varies (guns are dangerous, able to turn the entire planet's population into clones of himself, etc), it has a long history of extremely powerful characters and the potential for the Doctor himself to be the same way were it not for abritrarium
• Watchmen - It directly shows the plot around a high-level character without competition
• Looney Tunes - Especially the Dodo, though you might dismiss this due to the silliness

[tzor]

For the moment I’ll stick with Star Trek and Dr. Who (and ignore most of the modern Dr. Who in the process).

Star Trek is massively mid level to upper mid level. While the technology seems “advanced” it is only advanced in a linear fashion from the current norms. Any highly advanced technology is merely a plot MacGuffin. High level only really appears as a one shot plot device. The Borg, for example, has regeneration and assimilation, hardly the stuff of “epic” levels. (Trolls regenerate and Werewolves assimilate, for example and they are mid level.)

Dr. Who is filled with more and more high level characters but, again, only as plot (and in this case also as gag) devices. The Keeper of Traken, the Immortals, the Guardians, all have reality altering powers. Space and time are not limits and are constantly broken. (The TOMTIT experiment brought the entire universe that was hidden between the points of the universe into play. The N space adventures brought the entire notion of bubble universes and the end of Tom Baker’s role showed how the entire universe was keep “alive” merely through the application of mental formula impacting the physical universe.)

The Doctor’s “regeneration” literally has enough power to break the immortality cycle of a half dozen beings and in turn is equal to the power of a temporal paradox of a person in physical contact with his future self. The end of Tom Baker actually has a temporal paradox of its own in the form of the negatively (as it is clear he either “ends” or “begins” his life at the regeneration moment) travelling “Watcher” (“So the Watcher was the Doctor all the time”). (Note this wasn’t unique, there is another time lord whose assistant turned out to be his future self. This was back in the Pertwee era and I forget the exact name of the Time Lord, but the Doctor was quite fond of him and respected him.)

Thus Dr. Who does approach high level, but never quite remains there. But that it because the companions are generally low level and apart from regeneration the doctor is mostly mid level.

Getting to the higher level, I would actually recommend Dune, although it’s not obvious that dune is in fact high level. Most of the technology is linear extrapolation. But the spice brings with it a number of high level universe altering abilities including (In the case of Paul) the ability to see into the future.

[Chamomile]

Star Trek doesn't really strike me as "entire civilizations are but pawns in our game" the way high-level D&D typically is.

I'm not as familiar with Doctor Who, but it does strike me as being a high-level sort of thing. Doctor Who and antagonists on his level appear to be very much the exception rather than the rule (though obviously they show up every episode, because those are the only stories we actually want to see). It is kind of weird how he's vulnerable to any moron with a revolver while at the same time possessing godlike reality warping powers, which makes him a bit hard to pin down.

Doctor Manhattan is definitely high-level, but I wouldn't qualify Watchmen as a high-level story for the existence of one high-level character for the same reasons I wouldn't count TLA. It's not a story about high-level weight being thrown around, it's a mid-level story where high-level powers are used as a giant I Win button to resolve things.

[Maxus]

I've got to agree with Watchmen. Dr. Manhattan is beyond you, no matter who you are. He really does change the world by being in it. Veidt is sort of nudging up to mid-level ranges, himself.

And Dune? Got to disagree. The tech and the spice is some high-level stuff, but the people? I mean, most of Dune's predictive was "Paul got stoned out of his skull on spice and saw the jihad coming, and felt sad because he couldn't see a way around it." (Although my biggest problems with Dune were the beginning of that first book? With the political maneuvering? THat was good. The ending, when the Emperor steps in? That was also good. The mysticism-laden stuff in the middle? It didn't do much for me, but I respect the work that went into the culture and history there.)

Now, the Mentats were actually quite interesting. That's sort of high-level intellect while human empathy/intuition. The ability to predict what someone will do a dozen moves ahead because you know them? That, I liked. You could make an argument that that's what 25 or 30 in your Int score looks like, and how it can go to work for you.

[FatR]

So, without getting into edition-specific exploits, I believe these are some of the common traits of high-level RPGs I've seen or read about:

- Characters are kind of immune to people and things that remain in "mundane mortal" range in actual practice, even if in theory there are some extremely improbable scenarios where they can bring you down. You probably can kill several hundreds of them before retreating due to exhausting your mojo - without specifically preparing for it.

- Characters routinely fight kaiju, and win without invoking plot bullshit.

- Characters routinely fight things that are literally untouchable and invulnerable to any number of muggles, and win without invoking plot bullshit.

- Characters sometimes deal with threats that can and will wreak havoc on a scale of least one planet - without invoking plot bullshit - if not stopped, and win without invoking plot bullshit in their turn.

- Characters can cause destruction comparable with the worst natural disasters - maybe only after specifically preparing for it, but without permanently investing anything meaningful into it.

- For whatever reason, characters are extremely hard to perma-kill without using powers of comparable level to ensure that they die and stay dead. Also, ability to extended one's lifespan is expected from major power players.

- Travel is no longer an issue. You can get in any corner of the known universe and survive its natural hazards with only a bit of preparation. All non-artificial obstacles (and mundane artificial obstacles) are similarly easily bypassable. You can survive practically indefinitely in places near-instantly fatal to mundane mortals with only a bit of preparation.

- Characters can obtain almost any sort of information they need with only a bit of preparation, unless that information is concealed using powers of comparable level.

- Characters can acquire underlings that will look extremely impressive or even totally overpowered on mundane mortal scale without permanently investing anything meaningful into acquiring them, except a bit of time.

- Characters can obtain mundane wealth easily enough, that it has relatively little value to them. This doesn't necessarily mean conjuring stuff from thin air (although it might) - they might just be able to plunder a few tons of gold from a Lost City of Gold on the other side of the world, or run an kingdom-scale protection racket, or creating and selling magic perpetual motion engines, whatever. What matters is that characters can buy anything that money can buy, if they want, and they find that things money can buy aren't particularly valuable for them.

- Characters can significantly improve quality of life at least on a city scale without a special concentrated effort towards that end, just by regularly (and somewhat responsibly) using the powers they can spare.


Of course, in DnD and elsewhere, rarely all of them are true at once. A setting/story might be a high-level setting/story if 2-3 of them apply. It is most likely a high-level setting/story if half of more apply.

You might also notice that I've tried to exclude characteristics that describe political and other impact on the setting. That's because it highly depends on presence of other high-level characters, ready to cockblock the party, and also depends on whether the party is even inclined to work major changes.

[tzor]

I’ll admit that dune’s a hard one to see because the baseline story is mid level. The really cool kick ass reality bending stuff is either briefly mentioned or is in the sequels / prequels. Mentats really aren’t high level, they are just trained and they use an extreme form of “eight hour energy.” The Bene Geseret, on the other hand are wicked in some ways. In order to become a “Reverend Mother” you have to transmute poison that you ingested yourself. This gives you access to the pool of all current and past reverend mothers ever. (Just not the future ones; why you need a you know what to see into the future is extremely bizarre.) As a result the Reverend Mother becomes a festering snake pit of all sorts of nasty stuff. When Jessica’s mother tries to seduce Baron Harkonen for the second time (and is met with a rape scene from the homosexual baron) she gives him a disease that is the cause for his insane obesity. Not to mention the subliminal mind impacting technique of “the voice.”

Navigators can visually see a spot in physical space no matter where that spot is. (Too bad the FTL thing is actually a technological device, but it’s totally useless unless you know where you’re jumping to and whether it is not otherwise occupied.) They have literally been mutated by breathing the spice.

And the Telaxu are really (and I mean really) exceptionally necromantically creepy. Clone from the dead is somewhat a high level function. It’s not like raise from the dead, but it’s close.

[ishy]

- Characters routinely fight kaiju, and win without invoking plot bullshit.

What does Kaiju mean?

[hyzmarca]

- Characters routinely fight kaiju, and win without invoking plot bullshit.

What does Kaiju mean?

Strange beast is the literal translation. Giant monster is usually more appropriate.

Godzilla is a Kaiju.

[RadiantPhoenix]

Star Trek doesn't really strike me as "entire civilizations are but pawns in our game" the way high-level D&D typically is.

That's only because the Federation chooses not to do things that way.

Fabricate and Greater Teleport are an everyday fact of life for people on the Enterprise, deities are a curiosity to be studied, etc.

[K]

Star Trek doesn't really strike me as "entire civilizations are but pawns in our game" the way high-level D&D typically is.

That's only because the Federation chooses not to do things that way.

Fabricate and Greater Teleport are an everyday fact of life for people on the Enterprise, deities are a curiosity to be studied, etc.

The fate of entire planets and star systems are at the heart of a lot of Star Trek plots.

Star Trek is a classic example of "Low Character Level in a High Fantasy setting." The results and plots and tools are all high fantasy, but no one really thinks that Riker can take on more then 3-4 average guy guards trying to beat him up.

Lord of the Rings is the same. I mean, the One Ring can control minds and raise armies and the like, but it gets destroyed by fat children with a nicotine habit and the most powerful wizard in the world's most epic battle involves him smashing a few feet of stone bridge when it's got a three-ton monster standing on it.

[hyzmarca]

Star Trek is a classic example of "Low Character Level in a High Fantasy setting." The results and plots and tools are all high fantasy, but no one really thinks that Riker can take on more then 3-4 average guy guards trying to beat him up.

Yeah, but Riker has Giant Starship as a class feature. He doesn't need to be able to take on more than 3 or 4 average guards when he could just as easily slap his pin and call down an orbital phaser strike that stuns (or disintegrates, if he's being a dick) half the city

[fectin]

no one really thinks that Riker can take on more then 3-4 average guy guards trying to beat him up.

How well do wizards do, stripped of their components and spellbooks? If that's not what you were going for, then why is Riker's personal prowess sans phaser rifle and tachyon-based plot device any different?

[Chamomile]

Even with a phaser rifle, how many enemies equipped with ranged weapons can Riker take on his own, at the same time? That number's probably going to clock in at less than a thousand.

[K]

Star Trek is a classic example of "Low Character Level in a High Fantasy setting." The results and plots and tools are all high fantasy, but no one really thinks that Riker can take on more then 3-4 average guy guards trying to beat him up.

Yeah, but Riker has Giant Starship as a class feature. He doesn't need to be able to take on more than 3 or 4 average guards when he could just as easily slap his pin and call down an orbital phaser strike that stuns (or disintegrates, if he's being a dick) half the city

It's not a class feature. It's a setting feature (High Fantasy in Space to be specific).

I mean, when Riker is in a shuttlecraft or sipping a synth-ale in a DS9 bar, his ability to manipulate a setting feature (top-line starships) doesn't exist. It doesn't even exist when he's in his quarters on the ship or down in Engineering.

It only exists when he's on the bridge or in a very specific situation where can can communicate with the ship and the people on the ship aren't doing something more important (like following the Captain's orders or in the middle of a fight or something).

It's no different than having a king owe you a favor or knowing the location of a pool of water that can be used for scrying. It's not your ability, even if you can use it in very specific circumstances.

His ability to auto-win vs. 1-2 guards is totally a class ability, though. His understanding of tech is an ability because he can use it in multiple settings (to fix ships or open doors on abandoned space stations, for example).

[Krusk]

Which means my point, from the very beginning, has only been that high-level source material is vanishingly rare and that his assumption is stupid. There really is a dearth of high level material in the source.

Don't be stupid. You said

I assume when someone complains about the source material not supporting something, they mean "Peter Jacksons Lord ofthe Rings movies".

To that extent, i agree. High level dnd does not support aragorn, legolas, gimli or frodo.

Okay, give me any piece of fantasy fiction that has ever existed, up to and including myths, that supports high-level D&D storytelling but is not directly based off of a D&D setting.

We listed tons of them. Then you started goal shifting saying our stuff was too obscure, you hadn't read it, or that you really meant that it had to be 90% of the setting.

You said list any. We listed tons and called you dumb. You got mad and said ours didn't count.