What level do you prefer?

[Fizz]

My selection isn't really represented. I'd go with around 4th to 9th. The PCs are skilled enough to be heroes but not ridiculously powerful yet.

-Fizz

[geeman]

At 12:05 PM 10/3/2006, kgauck wrote:

>Let`s ask where people have the most fun playing.

I personally find D&D/D20 the most enjoyable at about 5-10th
level. Below that characters the vast array of creatures are
effectively out of reach and above that things start getting to the
point where dice are redundant and the system breaks.

Gary

[Vicente]

From 1 to 9th level, from there, combat gets a lot of "save or die"
mechanics everywhere...

Greetings!

Vicente

[cutenfluffy]

minimum of 3rd level when PCs are competent without being too action hero like.

Maximum of around 12th, as by that stage challenging PCs becomes very hard when you need to deal with teleportation, communes, save or dies, anti magic shells and the occasional disintergrate.

6th is a good number.

[Cmalik]

low level makes you rely on brains over brawn and even zombies can whup a party

[epicsoul]

low level makes you rely on brains over brawn and even zombies can whup a party

heh...

'course, the zombies might eat the brains with their brawn...

[cutenfluffy]

low level makes you rely on brains over brawn and even zombies can whup a party

It does however make players almost totally reliant on dice rolls though.

I much rather prefer to have my PCs be competent at what they do.

Having the wizard stabbing the final villain with a dagger cause all his spells ran out hours ago can be fun and exciting, but I tend to feel that the player with the wizard character would much prefer to be choosing which spell to use next against the villain than relying on melee to win the day.

[Smoke and Mirrors]

My favorite is

3rd and 4th level player characters
2nd level elites, officers and henchmen
1st level guards, warriors and thugs.

Our game is much more about politics and troop movements. We tend to play large decisive table top battles than dungeon quests.

[Green Knight]

Hmm, difficult one. I voted for medium-level, but I could have voted for low-level too. Seems to me the low leves are very important for character-building, but the mid-levels are where we get to enjoy the transition from nobodies to somebodies. So the mids are where you have some really great play moments...provided you took time and care to play through the lower levels as well.

Side note: I'm currently running a mixed epic and low/medium campaign. One set of PCs are ancient epic-levels, while the other set are low/medium level. The former are the great powers of their day, the later are their preferred troubleshooters. The actions/inactions of either PC set has an impact on the lives of the other set. Creates many interresting/amusing situations.

[evilRafael]

I started this campaign now, and it feels great to have them characters at very low levels and giving out little XP to keep them that way. It makes every little reward special, keeps them interested in amassing more power (since they don't have much of it), increases the power of alliances and the interest in henchmen, etc...

They might feel technically weak, but I gave them opportunities to amass political and economical powers, which doesn't depend on levels at all -- so the whole thing is a lot more realistic than usual for a DnD game.