People so commonly bypass Levels 1 & 2; that I would like to see sample 3rd Level characters, from the start.
Many people start at Level 3, or Level 5. That allows them to step into fun, functional, useful characters.
Quote from: Razor 007;1081222People so commonly bypass Levels 1 & 2; that I would like to see sample 3rd Level characters, from the start.
WoTC's 5e D&D website has pregens at every level from 1 to 10. I think that's a good approach - though they could probably have just done 1, 3 & 5 and covered 90% of demand.
Re starting with functional characters, I've found that just giving full CON score + max hit die in hit points at 1st level solves this for 5e D&D. It gives around 16 to 28 hp at level 1. The starting characters already have a decent number of options & abilities.
I seem to remember reading somewhere (not sure if it was during the playtest or later) that WOTC 'suggested' using 3rd level as the default starting point.
Which edition are you talking about?
I bypassed the first four levels for my ACKS game, though if I were to do it again I'd start at 3rd. Or else use my 0th+1st level idea so that 1st level isn't a "novice".
Has a lot to do with the experience of the players. With a group of nothing but veteran players for a given version, you can start at any level you want for the campaign. With a new system, it's usually useful to start at the lower end, just to simplify the acclimation.
With brand new, casual players? I'm starting at level 1 every time. The leveling itself is a bit of a novelty for them. Once a person has been through that a time or three, some still enjoy it, others just want to get to the level "where the action kicks in."
Quote from: Razor 007;1081222Many people start at Level 3, or Level 5. That allows them to step into fun, functional, useful characters.
Starting at level 3, 5, 10, 20, 100 in no way at all guarantees such things and for some would be the diametric opposite.
I happen to like starting out at level 1 in a campaign and trying to survive to the top. Its alot more fun than being just handed the power for no effort.
That said. The greater majority of TSR's modules started you off, or required you have an existing character, at a higher level. Some provided pregen's of appropriate level even. Same with a DM's campaign. It might be part of the opening setup that the PCs start off allready seasoned adventurers. Or perhaps they are skilled non-adventurers suddenly thrown into the fray.
The Dragonlance modules start off with the pregen PCs between levels 4 and 6, with Raistlin the exception at level 3 since he is a mage and needs more EXP to level.
Which brings up a method I was introduced to and have used for pre-3e D&D. Setting not a level. but an EXP amount.
For example say for a 2e campaign you set a starting EXP amount at 16000. That puts your fighter Cleric, Druid, Thief and Bard at level 5. While your Paladin, Ranger and Wizard are at level 4. Or say start off Multiclassed as a level 4/4 Fighter/Thief. With each class being at varying points towards their next level.
Quote from: Omega;1081252Which brings up a method I was introduced to and have used for pre-3e D&D. Setting not a level. but an EXP amount.
For example say for a 2e campaign you set a starting EXP amount at 16000. That puts your fighter Cleric, Druid, Thief and Bard at level 5. While your Paladin, Ranger and Wizard are at level 4. Or say start off Multiclassed as a level 4/4 Fighter/Thief. With each class being at varying points towards their next level.
Yes, we had several players at the time that really enjoyed that aspect of play for a module or a few modules strung together for a mini-campaign. For one thing, it tended to break people out of their ruts. Someone who "always played a fighter" might be tempted by having a higher-level character. It was a tiny bit of character maximizing that was one involved decision, and didn't really hurt anything for the players that didn't partake.
Quote from: Kiero;1081236Which edition are you talking about?
I bypassed the first four levels for my ACKS game, though if I were to do it again I'd start at 3rd. Or else use my 0th+1st level idea so that 1st level isn't a "novice".
I've read and witnessed people skipping Level 1 in lots of editions.
Any Palladium RPG I've ever played, we started off at second level.
Nobody starts their character at birth.
It's not weird that you'd 'pick up' your character's adventures at the appropriate time. Personally, I like starting the campaign with characters that have a significant amount of backstory. It makes it easier to tie events into the adventures. If the PC had talked about being a member of a mercenary company, for instance, you can introduce a 'war buddy' as a helpful contact or an antagonist (or BOTH) and it can help a lot.
But it really only helps if you want the PCs to have independent backstories. If they're all from the same village and all started adventuring at the same time, you might as well pick up the story from there.
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1081238Has a lot to do with the experience of the players. With a group of nothing but veteran players for a given version, you can start at any level you want for the campaign. With a new system, it's usually useful to start at the lower end, just to simplify the acclimation.
With brand new, casual players? I'm starting at level 1 every time. The leveling itself is a bit of a novelty for them. Once a person has been through that a time or three, some still enjoy it, others just want to get to the level "where the action kicks in."
I agree with this. New characters ought to experience the entire range of levels, including level one, so they can see how the characters develop and grow. Once you've played a lot you can skip over some levels if you like. On the other hand, I prefer to cap my campaigns at level ten or so, which means that I hate to skip over too many early on.
Also wanted to throw in that I think Monte Cook's World of Darkness rulebook started characters off at the equal to level 3. I think he renumbered the levels to make them read 1,2,3... but I think they were actually 3,4,5...
I think bypassing early levels is okay for two reasons, first is because you are playing a one shot or short more story based campaign like Dragonlance. The other being one player keeps getting killed over and over and needs a character that can contribute and keep up with the others. The other option is for a GM to just quick level characters in an intro level adventure so they easily survive it, have a reasonable number of magic items and some actual play experience together.
I was in one group where some of the players had versions of their characters made up for every level from 1-20. The GM decided what level the adventure required, and they used the appropriate version of the character. I remember that they played an adventure calling for 11th level characters and then the next one called for 7th level characters. This was 3.5 so items were assigned via wealth guidelines and anything not accounted for by that was lost/stolen/spent between adventures. The fact that they played back and forth across the lives of their characters out of chronological order didn't bother them at all--they remarked that it was like the tales of Conan (which started near the end of Conan's tales).
Quote from: HappyDaze;1081327I was in one group where some of the players had versions of their characters made up for every level from 1-20. The GM decided what level the adventure required, and they used the appropriate version of the character. I remember that they played an adventure calling for 11th level characters and then the next one called for 7th level characters. This was 3.5 so items were assigned via wealth guidelines and anything not accounted for by that was lost/stolen/spent between adventures. The fact that they played back and forth across the lives of their characters out of chronological order didn't bother them at all--they remarked that it was like the tales of Conan (which started near the end of Conan's tales).
Wow, I'd love to do that in ASOIAF. I suppose the characters were not supposed to die young/low-level, however?
Quote from: Alexander Kalinowski;1081374Wow, I'd love to do that in ASOIAF. I suppose the characters were not supposed to die young/low-level, however?
It was D&D. Death was a temporary setback. Besides, they laughed it off to playing "Crisis on Infinite Oerths" where each adventure was an alternate reality.
Quote from: deadDMwalking;1081310Nobody starts their character at birth.
No. But they may start their campaign at the beginning of their adventuring rather than X point into their tale. I mean there are movies and books and even legends that do this. The hero starting fairly basic and gradually improving. 2e even had an option to start off at level 0 where the PC is still in training. And that is something else that can be done. Playing out the pre-adventuring life.
It all depends on the campaign really.
Quote from: HappyDaze;1081381It was D&D. Death was a temporary setback. Besides, they laughed it off to playing "Crisis on Infinite Oerths" where each adventure was an alternate reality.
So, in ASOIAF the party would need a Red Priest/Priestess... still, could be fun.
I tend to like starting at level 1; having a character with ultimate powah is a lot more impressive and fun when you've experienced that character with relatively little power. Still, I can definitely get why people want to start at higher levels, and for some settings (especially high fantasy) you pretty much have to, if you don't want the PCs to be regularly outclassed by their allies/enemies.
Quote from: OmSwaOperations;1081635I tend to like starting at level 1; having a character with ultimate powah is a lot more impressive and fun when you've experienced that character with relatively little power. Still, I can definitely get why people want to start at higher levels, and for some settings (especially high fantasy) you pretty much have to, if you don't want the PCs to be regularly outclassed by their allies/enemies.
Personally, I don't find upper levels very interesting either.
A decade ago, I tried a new tactic with my OD&D game. I made death at 0 HP, but instead of dying at -10 HP, you got +10 HP. Thus, your first level dork has 10 + 1D6 HP so they appear much chunkier. In actual play, its really an illusion of power. The players enjoyed the illusion, and I kept enjoying the high kill rate of my game world.
As I've mentioned before, I've gone over to "survive the adventure, gain a level" with level 10 max. Players love the fast leveling, PCs die regularly so the survival aspect is a big deal and the level 10 cap creates a backstop vs. the game going superhero.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1082150As I've mentioned before, I've gone over to "survive the adventure, gain a level" with level 10 max. Players love the fast leveling, PCs die regularly so the survival aspect is a big deal and the level 10 cap creates a backstop vs. the game going superhero.
With 5e I've found giving full CON (instead of attribute bonus) at 1st level works fantastically well. One weird effect is it makes the game grittier, since healing magic & hit dice are relatively less powerful.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1082150A decade ago, I tried a new tactic with my OD&D game. I made death at 0 HP, but instead of dying at -10 HP, you got +10 HP. Thus, your first level dork has 10 + 1D6 HP so they appear much chunkier. In actual play, its really an illusion of power. The players enjoyed the illusion, and I kept enjoying the high kill rate of my game world.
I tried something similar once, but instead of 10 I chose to use 1/2 of the character's Constitution score (rounded up). I rationalized that D&D "hit points" were mostly short-term getting tired and whatnot, but those 1/2 CON points were actual body damage, so most "hit points" would heal up in a day or two but those body points took a major rest of several days. When characters started to get low, players started to get really paranoid.
Which is a shame, because the only thing more FUN than starting at level 1 is starting at level 0. See the DCC funnel, or Shadow of the Demon Lord.
I say we bring back Negative-levels like in Unearthed Arcana! Who's WITH ME?!?!? We'll show those whiny players!
Just came up with this IMC:
Typical PC Level New PC Start Level & Gear
1-4 1 Standard
5-6 2 Standard +50gp
7-8 3 Standard +75gp
9-10 4 Standard +100gp
11 5 1 Uncommon +100gp
12 6 1 Uncommon +200gp
13 7 1 Uncommon +300gp
14 8 1 Uncommon +400gp
15 9 2 Uncommon +500gp
16 10 2 Uncommon +750gp
17 11 1 Rare +1 Uncommon + 1000gp
18 12 1 Rare +1 Uncommon +2000gp
19 13 1 Rare +2 Uncommon +2500gp
20 14 1 Rare +2 Uncommon +4000gp
20+ 15 1 Very Rare +1 Rare +2 Uncommon +5000gp
Quote from: Razor 007;1081222People so commonly bypass Levels 1 & 2; that I would like to see sample 3rd Level characters, from the start.
Many people start at Level 3, or Level 5. That allows them to step into fun, functional, useful characters.
GURPS starting heroic point level of 125 points character with 40 points of disadvantage and 5 points of quirks are in my experience equivalent to most editions of D&D 5th level character.
In my Majestic Wilderlands I consider levels to be the following
1st - trained novice i.e. apprentice
3rd - trained profession i.e. journeyman
6th - experienced professional i.e. master
9th - recognized as a regional expert i.e. grandmaster
12th - renowned for expertise nobel/olympic caliber
16th - legendary reputation Merlin/Da Vinci/Newton/Alexander the Great/etc
As for starting wealth I found dividing the total xp earned by the character by 10 and allowing purchases of magic items gets you into the ballpark of what a character should have at that level.
Wrapping it up
What levels are is a legacy of my original Wilderlands campaigns using AD&D 1st edition.
The wealth rule came from the work I am doing for my Majestic Fantasy rules. The followup to my Majestic Wilderlands supplement.
What I did is use Inspiration Pad Pro 3.0 by nBos to code up my tables and had it generate thousands of result. I tweaked the tables until they started to produce equipment list similar to what come up with by hand.
The system work by dividing wealth into 5,000d lots, 1,000d lots, and 100d lots. Each lot has a chance to be swapped out for a magic items of similar value. A lot of the work I did was tweaking the odds of magic items being swapped. It also includes chances that a high value magic items may be swapped out for a number of lower value items.
For example a 9th level character with 165,000 xp thus used a base wealth of 16,500
Magic Items: +2 Broadsword, Throwing Axe with +1 damage only, 1 Bolt with +2 damage only
Scrolls & Charms: Charm of Restoration, Scroll of Dimension Door, Scroll of Magic Missile, Scroll of Cure Light Wounds, Scroll of Protection from Evil, Charm of Command, Scroll of Light, Scroll of Charm Person
Potions: Potion of Invulnerability, Potion of Treasure Finding, Potion of Healing, Potion of Healing
Jewelry: Gold Pendent (300d)
Gems: Opal Gem (250d), Quartz Gem (5d)
Coins: 5 crowns (1,600d), 3,651d
Still working on class specific tables.
Charms are like scroll, use them and the spell is discharged. However they can be used by any class, cost double the scroll cost to make, but cost half scroll cost to recharge.
Quote from: S'mon;1082225Just came up with this IMC:
Typical PC Level New PC Start Level & Gear
16 10 2 Uncommon +750gp
17 11 1 Rare +1 Uncommon + 1000gp
I'd recommend that you go from 2 uncommon to 1 rare + 2 uncommon. Otherwise you explicitly have to lose an item to gain a better item.
It's not clear if you retain common items between jumps, but in general, just adding an additional item is easier than removing/replacing an item.
Quote from: deadDMwalking;1082236I'd recommend that you go from 2 uncommon to 1 rare + 2 uncommon. Otherwise you explicitly have to lose an item to gain a better item.
It's not clear if you retain common items between jumps, but in general, just adding an additional item is easier than removing/replacing an item.
It's only for new characters, so no one ever loses an item.
We use "Player level" separate from character level. Basically, if you've played up to Nth level in the campaign with any character, you can start a new character at N - 4 (if you want). No magic items, though. If other characters won't to loan you a spare weapon, that's on them.
The bit about starting at 3rd level came out very early. tl;dr - veteran players aren't going to get a sense of wonder from the early levels twice, so skip if they're not that interested in the challenge alone. This is from the 1E DMG:
Quote from: DMG pg 12STARTING LEVEL OF EXPERIENCE FOR PLAYER CHARACTERS
As a general rule the greatest thrill for any neophyte player will be the first
adventure, when he or she doesn't hove any real idea of what is happening,
how powerful any encountered monster is, or what rewards will be
gained from the adventure. This assumes survival, and you should gear
your dungeon to accommodate 1st level players. If your campaign has a
mixture of experienced and inexperienced players, you should arrange for
the two groups to adventure separately, possibly in separate dungeons, at
first. Allow the novice players to learn for themselves, and give experienced
players tougher situations to face, for they already understand most
of what is happening - quite unlike true 1st level adventurers of the
would-be sort, were such persons actually to exist.
If you have an existing campaign, with the majority of the players being
already above 1st level, it might be better to allow the few newcomers to
begin at 2nd level ot even 3rd or 4th in order to give them a survival
chance when the group sets off for some lower dungeon level. I do not
personally favor granting unearned experience level(s) except in extreme
circumstances such as just mentioned, for it tends to rob the new player of
the real enjoyment he or she would normally feel upon actually gaining
levels of experience by dint of cleverness, risk, and hard fighting.
It has been called to my attention that new players will sometimes become
bored and discouraged with the struggle to advance in level of experience,
for they do not have any actual comprehension of what it is like to
be a powerful character of high level. In a well planned and well judged
campaign this is not too likely to happen, for the superior DM will have just
enough treasure to whet the appetite of players, while keeping them lean
and hungry still, and always after that carrot just ahead. And one player's
growing ennui can often be dissipated by rivalry, i.e., he or she fails to go
on an adventure, and those who did play not only had an exciting time but
brought back a rich haul as well. Thus, in my opinion, a challenging
campaign and careful refereeing should obviate the need for immediate
bestowal of levels of experience to maintain interest in the game.
However, whatever the circumstances, if some problem such as this exists,
it has been further suggested that allowing relatively new players to
participate in a modular campaign game (assuring new players of
characters of higher level) would often whet their appetites for continued
play at lower level, for they can then grasp what it will be like should they
actually succeed in attaining proficiency on their own by working up their
original characters and gaining high levels of experience. This reasoning
seems sound, and provided there is a separation of the two campaigns,
and the one isn't begun until new players have had some number of
expeditions as 1st level characters, it is not destructive to the game as o
whole.
Ha! I totally do the opposite. In Lion & Dragon you start as a level 0 apprentice.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1083018Ha! I totally do the opposite. In Lion & Dragon you start as a level 0 apprentice.
Yes, I am aware; and that can be fun. But most players won't be excited, if every campaign starts at Level 0. I wonder how many people skip past Level 1 in D&D 5E?
Quote from: Razor 007;1083043Yes, I am aware; and that can be fun. But most players won't be excited; if every campaign starts at Level 0. I wonder how many people skip past Level 1 in D&D 5E?
I prefer to make Level 1 more durable since IME there is a special magic about starting at 1. Bringing in PCs later in the campaign I eventually have to allow levels above 1, but it pains me a little.
I think it really depends on two things: The group of players and the type of game you want to run (Edition is mildly a third reason). If I have an experienced group of people, jumping into an Adventure Path for 6th level characters isn't difficult at all and can be fun for them because they already know the ropes of levels 1 through 5. OTOH, my group right now has gone from 1st level through now 6th level in our 4th Edition game and it was mostly done because I have a new player and my 10-year old daughter, so I felt starting small with a limited number of options and paths was easier to get into than "hey, here's 50+ feats, powers, items and you have to pick you Paragon Path and make sure you set your stats right for this feat at 21st- blah blah.
I will say that having a character survive from 1st level (or in some instances, 0-level - which honestly might be the next 4E game I run muahahaha) and progress to the upper tiers of heroic awesomeness is VERY rewarding. There's something about seeing the organic progression from fledgling nobody to a person recognized across multiple regions because of your actions. Not to mention how they can shape the areas they've been in.
I've started campaigns at higher level and started campaigns at level 1 (or even 0). My only word of caution for starting at higher levels is that the more complex the system, the more a player learns how his class works as he/she levels. I've played in a game where we started at level 7 and a lot of the players were like, "Woah, these are a lot of systems to take in all at once." You get to ease into those systems if you start at 1, or even 3.
This isn't as much of a problem with OSR games, or other games with simpler mechanics.
Quote from: S'mon;1083057I prefer to make Level 1 more durable since IME there is a special magic about starting at 1. Bringing in PCs later in the campaign I eventually have to allow levels above 1, but it pains me a little.
Which is the same as letting the players start at a higher level but renaming it 'one'.
The experience points for low levels in 5E are extremely low, so you might as well consider 3rd Level as starting characters.
I DMed one AD&D group that started out as zero level using the Treasure Hunt module. They were 12th-13th Level when the campaign was retired a few years later.
Quote from: Razor 007;1083043Yes, I am aware; and that can be fun. But most players won't be excited, if every campaign starts at Level 0. I wonder how many people skip past Level 1 in D&D 5E?
One or two of the 5e modules suggest starting at level 3 or so. Princes of the Apocalypse for example. Rise of Tiamat at level 8 since it is supposed to be a continuation of the prior module.