High Level Play

Anyone running, or planning to run, some serious high-level play games? Meaning the PCs are gods and goddesses or close to it? Where they are the rulers of the lands, the premiere supers on the planet, the best agents in the world, etc.? Games where the NPCs don't straight-up outshine the PCs at every turn, where the PCs are the cream of the crop?

Asking -- literally -- for a friend, who has been looking for that style of game a loooooong time. I know they're out there, but they do seem rare.

Ideas?

A long time ago, a ran a game of Mythender as a one-off for my tabletop group. It's a fun power fantasy about fighting gods and stealing their power. Best of all, the rulebook is free!

I may be willing to run a game here if people are interested. :D

@Nezzeraj ran that on here a while back. It was a fun experiment, but the system is a bit too mechanical for me to play more than that test of it

Mythender is great fun but I feel it works better in person.

Genuinely curious what is the appeal of high level-play? Does your friend want to just run a kingdom or destroy enemies with 9th level spells? There's not much conflict inherent in the PCs being the most powerful forces in the land.

I did run 2 T4 campaigns. Very fun!

Something like Godbound maybe?

What is considered to be a high level game? I did put an idea out for a 9th level game but had no interest in discord really.

Soulbound has also a very similar style. I'd like to run a game once

Soulbound has also a very similar style. I'd like to run a game once

She might be!
Well, it wouldn't be for everyone, but some folks want to play the dragon sometimes, the queen, the archmagess, the giantess, the warrior princess, the best mecha pilot in the strongest mech in the west. In most games, you don't start there, you have to scrap for it. There are *loads* of games where you start as a badass, I maintain, but she's convinced people either don't run those or run them and still deflate the PCs by making them second-tier to their pet NPCs and villains and such. It's just a different way to play -- she's looking for an experience where she's running the kingdom / empire, she's the top of the pyramid without having to level or grind to get there.
Don't know what T4 campaigns are!
Higher than 9th, at least if there are loads of 15th and 20th level characters running around.

I've recommended Godbound before, Fate and PbtA spun the right way, and various supers games. She's right about one thing at least -- these games are few and far between.

Tier 4 games in 5e. From level 16+. They were very, very funny

Ah, my knowledge of 5e is... limited to say the least.

Depending on Lifepath choices, you can get a high-level character in Burning Wheel, Burning Empires, etc..., which might be a fun option.

As much as I admire Burning Wheel and so much about it... yeah, NOPE. Steering well clear of that for PbP play. :)

I am that friend.

I didn't know it was acceptable to just ask for game-things on GP, and Harrigan is probably tired of me bothering him. =p

Essentially, a "high-level character" is actually important in their setting. Not important in the nonsense redirection way that "destiny hinges on your actions," but rather, someone whose decisions matter without contrivance. In high-fantasy settings typical for D&D, that's a deity. In a more realistic fantasy game, that's a dragon, monarch, high priest of a large religion, etc. In Shadowrun, that's a Great Dragon. In Exalted, a high-Essence Celestial. In a superhero game, that's somebody on Superman's level, probably. Most superhero settings have characters of that magnitude.

Typical RPG settings are so buried in hierarchy and tiers of super-NPCs that these characters are often god-like or actually deities, though they don't necessarily have to be.
I would try it. I'm much more interested in play gods (or whatever high-tier entity) than killing them. But I would try it!
The appeal is having freedom and agency to both choose and undertake actions of one's own volition. Rather than merely being given quests. A high-level character might take quests, but instead of being the character that reacts to circumstances, they can act on the world to achieve ambitions and dreams greater than doing the bidding of others or being subject to the mercies of destiny. They can choose to do so and have at least a reasonable chance of succeeding.

It's also in the novelty of the experience. As I said to Harrigan yesterday:

The reason that standard roleplaying games just don't offer novelty is that the typical way of exploring new things in RPGs is to focus on weakness and inferiority. Halflings are short, tieflings have it hard because people are racist, etc. These have all been done to death and back. I've been there, done that, and bought the T-shirt, repeatedly, and no game I've ever been part of has progressed past the point of being a nobody who has to be afraid of every shadow. I want to explore new things that are new because they are strong and superior, e.g., the aforementioned giants or dragons. They're both very different from normal life and superior to normal people in meaningful ways. That's also why I think faeries, vampires, and other kinds of supernatural creatures could be interesting to play.

And considering the idea that there isn't much conflict if PCs are in the highest tier of characters of the setting: How can that be the case, when super-powerful NPCs have their own motives for acting and things they do? E.g., if two gods are fighting each other, why must a PC be a questing minion for them, rather than one of those gods? Conflict isn't just about the weaker struggling against the stronger. Even if that is the nature of the conflict, why must the PCs always be the weaker party? Why can it not be that outnumbered antagonists opposed the smaller number of PCs? Or just one PC.
I have a history with Godbound. People have offered to run it several times and then either not followed through or got mad at me and kicked me out because I had some objection or another to the system and tried to explain my position rather than just obeying the prospective GM. One I recall in particular got very upset with me because I did not like that there are ultra-uber-being NPCs who are better than any PC could ever be no matter what, and I would prefer that to just not be the case.
What's Soulbound?
Does this website have a Discord server?

Like Harrigan said, a high-level game is very dependent on context. 9th level characters aren't anybody worth caring about in the Forgotten Realms, for example, where the NPCs higher than level 20 fill multiple books and there's three layers of increasing powerful gods on top of them.
What are those games?

------

For what it's worth, I'm fine being the only player.

I was in a game once where we were demigods trying to achieve full godhood. It was fun to have one aspect each that was beyond mortal abilities. Part of the game was against other demigods and having to figure out how to get around their unique aspects by setting or changing the situation and maximizing your own aspect. We each got to choose a companion or two who were high level or monsters. It made for some interesting scenarios and fights.

I would like to play in a high tier game again but it would depend on the system. I am unfamiliar with many of those mentioned but am up for learning.

Hmmm, I'm almost tempted to break out my BECMI Immortals rules and run something, but most of you kids wouldn't be familiar with the rules.

Indeed I am not familiar with that. If I could find the rules I would try.

It does. Here's an invite link: Link

Thanks! ^_^

BECMI is just 80s D&D, the whole Basic-Expert-Companion-Master-Immortal stuff that was the flipside of 1e AD&D in those days. I've always read good things about Allston's Rules Cyclopedia, which came out in 91 as a connected, cleaned up version of all that, I think. Might lack the Immortal levels, though...

I never heard them referrer to as "BECMI" but I grew up on the box sets before they had editions. I played one a bit ago, totally forgetting clerics didn't even have spells till 2nd level. 1st level was really scary easy to die.

Just to repeat what I'm understanding here, you want "decisions to matter without contrivance." What matters is the "freedom and agency to choose and undertake actions of one's own volition." You are possibly thinking high-level play will correct this, because the fictional positioning and fictional authority implicit in high-level play, will allow the character to express their freedom.

Does that sound about right?

My gut feeling is you're looking for Storygame or Narrativist style of play, which Burning Wheel is just one of many. My gut also says that the high-level color, genre, or flavor, is not required to get that style of play. Rather, it is an agreement between players to play in a particular style, and finding a rule set that supports it.

Have you tried any Narrativist or Storygame systems?

That being said, I shy away from abstract game theory discussions - and prefer just to play games, and not stress the philosophy of it all.

If you wanted to experiment with this style of play... I think Ironsworn could be good entry into narrativist play (though it has a learning curve) but I find it does well in PbP. If you still wanted that high-level flavor/color/genre, Ironsworn can handle that by just adjusting the assets.

The Rules Cyclopedia does lack the Immortals rules, but I have all five sets, so that wouldn't be an issue. As for finding the rules, all boxed sets are available on DriveThruRPG, and really, if you have played D&D, you've played BECMI. For a brief history of the controversial Immortals rules, you can take a look here. I'd have to look them over again, as it's been a long while since I've played with them, but if enough people were interested, I might be persuaded to run something.

For the most part. Powerful characters are much more likely than weak characters to possess agency, but they do not necessarily have it.
I can't answer that accurately, since I don't know what specifically is a Narrativist or Storygame system. I have tried to play many games with fewer or looser rules than usual, such as the ubiquitous Fate and Powered by the Apocalypse.
Thank you for the suggestion.

I've been looking for a dnd 5e game that starts at level 5 or 6 and goes all the way to level 20 for a very long time too so that's what I think a high tier dnd game.

I think Rabbits has the gist of it, and is onto something. I’ve struggled to really articulate what I think would answer the mail on what BDG is after. I do not think it’s just high level D&D / trad play, but a completely different style of game — one where the PCs are badasses, they are the center of the story, etc. Being powerful in terms of mechanics doesn’t necessarily give you agency, though certain abilities, spells and such certainly help. But you need the social contract part of it, the ‘GM is a fan of the players’ bit that is so prevalent, indeed, in PbtA and Fate games.

I’ve got to think something like games like Monster of the Week, Nights Black Agents, various two-fisted pulp games and various superhero games are really well-suited overall, but I think what’s needed is that agreement and accord on the style of play.

This type of game sounds like it could be super fun. In some aspects it could be harder, in my experience of games, but it would be very rewarding. Not knowing the systems mentioned, my viewpoint could be somewhat limited.

Even if the characters are given a situation, and then some of their resources, they would still be the large driving force around what happens over all. I would think that basics, or limitations per character, would have to be given/settled in character/world setup as it could possibly have players going 'what do we do?' for eons.

Like, if a pc was a ruler, what tools/pawns do they have? Then when the pc encounters the overall situation, they have knowledge of tools they can use to handle it how they want to handle it. Do they have alliances with other rulers? A large military force or a small one? Good/poor diplomatic relations? A reliable spy network? Trustworthy/suspicious aides/subordinates?

If a pc was that legendary hermit people went to for advice, how solitary are they? Why do they help or not help? Would they have animal connections? Be welcomed by old friends, people or places they have assisted? Be spurned by places/people who either did not get help or did not like the advice and so didn't use it? Would they have acolytes/apprentices around the place?

Or if the pc is a hidden figure, moving things behind the scenes, how do they do so? Are they reliant on the underworld or are they just incognito as they hate the spotlight?

Over all it sounds quite interesting. Even if it seems like someone else's problem they want help with, the scale would be grander and your help - if granted - would mean that you had control over the outcome. If you asked a dragon to help save your village, and they accepted, they would 100% have the commanding role there. Even a ruler would have to listen to the dragon they asked for help.

I'd love to try and play a game like this, and it also sounds interesting to run. As a GM you could, in general, be more reactive when making the plot outside of overall set up as you are narrating the outcome of their choices and not giving them the choices to make. It wouldn't be the pcs playing your story as a 'choose your own adventure' type deal, but more the GM offers premise and outcomes/consequences while the players create the story. Like giving the GM multiple writing prompts almost.

This sounds like a game I'd like to run some day, but using Feng Shui. The premise would be time traveling to fight the old gods who are messing with history.

In Feng Shui the characters are world beaters, action movie heroes basically. Big Trouble in Little China, or more James Bond or Rambo or Kill Bill than say a drama about sad people.

Big Trouble in Little China is such a good movie. Cheesy, old, probably offensive, but a lot of it still stands up. That would be a heck of a fun game. I'll have to google Feng Shui though.

Being the A-Team in your game would be so fun. Just a good, quirky time.

That would be ideal

I was thinking about running a High or higher power level prowlers and paragons game with three or more simultaneous unrelated nation or world threatening events / antagonists, possibly with the players splitting into teams to tackle different threats depending on what their powers are suited for

I wouldn't know. I've never been in a game of either that lasted more than two scenes. Quite a few Apocalypse World games I've tried to be a part in have explicitly banned the playbook I find most interesting, Hardholder.
Does this site have post karma I can award? My approval of this post is very high.

Also, Big Trouble in Little China is one of the greatest films of all time.
While I would be willing to try it, this does miss the mark somewhat, because my immediate question is "well why am I not playing those old gods messing with history? Time wars! Heccin yeah!"
I do like superheroines.

I've just joined the discord, ping me any time if you'd like to brainstorm something or just chat

Incidentally, Q, I have recommended Feng Shui as a potentially great platform for this kind of character-driven, high-agency, badasses extraordinaire game to BDG before...

Great minds think alike! And so to we, DUR!

I just came here to throw my hat in the ring to play the BBEG.

You dont want to GM GOD tier threats and play the God Tyr.

I've asked to play a villain or villain protagonist quite a few times. It tends to go South when I start explaining, as reasonably as I can manage, that a proper single antagonist in a game with a lot of fighting needs to be able to take the entire PC party at once and have a decent chance of winning, or they're not scary. That's usually when I'm yelled at or kicked out.

Same here!

Any advice on presenting a BBEG the party can not defeat? I tried it once and thought it would be awesome for level 4 characters to see a dragon and survive.
But they got mad they had to run away. They said it wasn't heroic, which is what they wanted.

I know this isn't an interest check (but we're at the Tavern, right?)... So, just saying - I'm interested in playing this one. Count me in, whenever you run it. =D

Maybe consider not putting things in the game that the players don't find fun

I completely agree.

But holding ones own against an alliance of gods is not merely by being more powerful. It would most certainly require a god to be more ruthless and corrupt than all others. The God Lopt comes to mind. He used guile, deception, illusion, seduction, and intimidation to turn gods and giants against one another for his benefit.

A striker as you described has the role of ascending as Father or Mother. It is detestable if it becomes a villain. That is probably why it recieved such a visceral reaction. At least as I see it and most cultures I have studied. How could Thor, Friend of Humanity be a villain?
When playing against heroes it is the villains role to lose but win by corrupting the heroes to their fall - you either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain. Sigurd, Horus, and Gilgamesh are great examples of this. The Villain cannot win this story, except as a catalyst for the heroes to become greater still and rise above a nearly hopeless obstacle. Like The Returners vs. Ascended God of Magic Kefka.

When playing against professionals it is the villains role to compromise, and corrupt. To enable the hero to achieve their dreams as a means of profit. To subvert, and control the narrative to alienate and villify the hero. See Lex Luthor and Superman. The Villain wins based on a Propaganda victory, changing the hearts and minds of the people, at the chagrin of the hero.

Against artists the villan uses aesthetics to undermine morality. "Virtue is based on beauty, one is a hero for smashing a cockroach, and a villain for harming a butterfly." The villain almost always wins this scenario, unless the hero can achieve unity, bliss, and the power of love. Otherwise the villain represents the world, since money will always be difficult to obtain for the artist. I like to use ultra powerful vampires running corporations in this model.

And always remember, in a story the villain needs motive, it has the sole purpose of making the hero better. The Villain is often also referred to as "The Threshold" in old stories, and I quite like that description. But your mileage may vary, and no one answer will satisfy.

Don't do that if you can avoid it. Certainly never use an unbeatable enemy as a total surprise. Unless the game has hopelessness baked into its premise, like Call of Cthulhu, people will generally have the reaction those players did. If you want there to be an unstoppable force or villain or antagonist that the PCs will lose to, no matter what, then you need to make it clear before anyone even joins to play that they're going to be dealing with powers greater than they can handle and that mere survival should be considered a victory.

If you really want to include something that players will lose to and its part of the game premise that such things will occur from time to time, then it is best, generally, to treat them as environmental, rather than directly antagonistic. In the case of the aforementioned dragon, level 4 characters are totally outclassed, so they will fail, badly, if they interact with it at all. Consequently, instead of the dragon coming after them, it should go after something else that is near them, preferably in a lightning strike attack that is more confusing than awe-inspiring or frightening. E.g., maybe the dragon is stealing something important from the castle in the town the PCs live in, such as a magic rod that is the key to opening a lost treasure vault and nobody who lives in the castle knows the rod's significance, and its minions burn down half the town in the process. The dragon gets what it wants and leaves, the PCs can be suitably intimidated, and the actual things they encounter and deal with can be appropriate to their abilities.
The Aesir weren't exactly good guys. I could see Thor being sick of other peoples' nonsense and just going on a murder spree. =p

Thanks for the feedback. The idea was to show them some grandure as well as give warning that they could find themselves in dangerous situtions is care was not taken. But aparenlty the executions was off. I need to work on providing clues and hints without giving things away, or as you said make it an enviromental aspec not an opponent. That should work without actually presenting a no win situation. Thans again :)

He wouldnt care, a god cares as much for human foibles as much as we care about the opinion of an ant.