D&D 5E Exhaustion for old 1e undead level drain

[Bedrockgames]

But which version ? Are there still that many people playing hardcore AD&D 1 level drain ? Where there is almost no way to get it back and you have to continue adventuring with other characters 2 or 4 levels above you ? It worked for us as a club at the time, because even drained characters could adventure with other characters of their level from other people in other modules. But are there still people playing that way ?

Yes, there are people playing this way. It isn't for everyone. And with games like AD&D you may see many different GM interpretations of it, but I usually try to play with some form of permanent or long term level drain (it largely depends on the group I am playing with). When I play Ravenloft for example, I use the standard AD&D 2E rules for level drain. Mostly I make my own games and in ones that have levels, I have been including permanent level drain because that is what I do at my table. It is about the stakes it creates for me. It isn't something you can do with every group of players. But if players are all for it, it definitely can work great, and there are people who still like that.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Level drain was a fun AD&D threat IF you could avoid it. When it actually hit, less fun and hurt feelings unless your DM generously stocked treasure hoards with greater restoration spells and house-ruled the XP loss didn't apply.

It is like anything with high stakes: the fun is the thrill it adds to the game. It is fun because you are terrified of it happening. So it adds a level of tension to the game you just can't get otherwise (at least in my opinion). But obviously losing a level itself isn't a fun act. If it were fun, it wouldn't be adding stakes in the way that it does. It is because it is punitive, that it creates that emotional response in the game. I like to call it having a gambler's mindset. For me one of the things that made the game so exciting when I first started was the possibility of a character dying, was going up against foes that could really make you hurt by draining levels. It just had such a potent effect on me as a player. But I realize it isn't everyone's cup of tea (and that level drain is something that isn't really the norm these days----at least not old school level drain).

And true, availability of things like restoration make a big difference here.

 

[Lyxen]

I think that's kind of the point, isn't it; that the adventure fights back and does its best to prevent you from finishing it?

Huh, no. This is not a question of conflict between the DM and the players, or the Adventure and the players. It's an adventure that is supposed to make the players happy to have fun with it.

Again, that's the point. Strahd ain't there to be nice and invite the PCs in for a nice sup of tea; he's defending his home against invaders and using whatever he can bring to bear to do so. And if one batch of his minions can't kill you they can still weaken you, to make the job easier for the next batch of minions; and if the PCs aren't wise enough to retreat to town for reinforcements and recovery that's on them. (I6 is one of the very few old-school modules I don't own and haven't read so I'll confess to not knowing whether that module traps the PCs in Strahd's realm or not)

I have nothing against the principles, it's the means employed which are not fun. Invalidating hours of gameplay ? Making the completion of the adventure absolutely impossible ? Not fun.

It's war, not sport, and there's going to be casualties. Survival is priority one.

Even when playing old school, we recognised that the fun was elsewhere than in putting the PCs against impossible odds. I defy anyone to survive I6 if the monsters are played intelligently, using regular even 7th level AD&D characters.

It's only a bad mechanic if you expect adventures to be sporting, without lasting or expensive consequences.

It depends what kind of consequences.

You're assuming there's not already that much level variance within the party to begin with.

AD&D adventures were within a few levels for participating characters, for example, Ravenloft is 5th-7th.

In 1e it's common to have a fairly wide level variance within a party. Experience has taught me that if you take the party's average level, anything within a + or - 2 range from that is usually viable; except at low levels it's + or - half the average instead.

No, for me that is way too much. It would mean for example mixing 1st and 5th level, or 5th and 9th level, way too much for me.

So, if the party average is 6th the viable range is about 4th-8th; if the party average is 3rd then 2nd-4th is viable; if the average is 9th then 7th-11th works fine, and so on.

The level ranges were usually smaller than this, I'd say 3 level on average. The A series is 4-7. G1-3 is 8-12 but it's because there are 3 adventures, so G1 is 8-10, etc. The I series has a 2 level variance on average, etc.

The thing is that, in AD&D, a 5th level MU had more XPs than a 7th level rogue although he was about the same level of power...

Yes. One of them is typing this right now.

Good for you, but as you can see, this does not make a significant percentage of the gaming community.

 

[Casimir Liber]

I guess it really boils down to communication, and the DM's understanding of their players' playing style and preferences really. Obviously alot of us play different ways and have different levels of severity (a bit like comparing Dark Sun and Grimmdark campaigns (or CoC for that matter) with more lighthearted ones etc.)

 

[Lanefan]

Huh, no. This is not a question of conflict between the DM and the players, or the Adventure and the players. It's an adventure that is supposed to make the players happy to have fun with it.



I have nothing against the principles, it's the means employed which are not fun. Invalidating hours of gameplay ? Making the completion of the adventure absolutely impossible ? Not fun.

Even when playing old school, we recognised that the fun was elsewhere than in putting the PCs against impossible odds. I defy anyone to survive I6 if the monsters are played intelligently, using regular even 7th level AD&D characters.

The fun maybe lies in overcoming those seemingly-impossible odds, hm?

AD&D adventures were within a few levels for participating characters, for example, Ravenloft is 5th-7th.

Most of 'em have a level range listed, and some suggest a total-levels amount as well. Keep in mind also that 1e parties were often much bigger than the now-standard 4 members.

No, for me that is way too much. It would mean for example mixing 1st and 5th level, or 5th and 9th level, way too much for me.

1st-5th is too much, but 2nd-5th can work fine. 5th-9th is also fine.

In one game I play in the PCs currently range from 7th to 13th (mine is the 7th); in the other it's from 8th-13th (mine is 10th).

The level ranges were usually smaller than this, I'd say 3 level on average. The A series is 4-7. G1-3 is 8-12 but it's because there are 3 adventures, so G1 is 8-10, etc. The I series has a 2 level variance on average, etc.

The thing is that, in AD&D, a 5th level MU had more XPs than a 7th level rogue although he was about the same level of power...

True. There's also level drain, level gain (e.g. via wish or decks of many things etc.), ability/willingness to train into a new level (if using 1e RAW), and a bunch of other factors to consider.

The characters in the party I'm DMing are, by sheer random chance, all currently 5th level; and I'm honestly not sure if I've ever otherwise DMed a party at that or higher level where everyone was the same. It won't last long, though; I think at least one of 'em is about to bump, probably next time I give out xp...

 

[Jack Daniel]

The characters in the party I'm DMing are, by sheer random chance, all currently 5th level; and I'm honestly not sure if I've ever otherwise DMed a party at that or higher level where everyone was the same. It won't last long, though; I think at least one of 'em is about to bump, probably next time I give out xp...

Whoa, that is weird for AD&D. Does your party not have any multiclassed characters either?

(I'm running OD&D right now, and thirteen sessions into the campaign, the PCs' levels are already an asynchronous smear across the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd experience levels!)

 

[Lanefan]

Whoa, that is weird. Does your party not have any multiclassed characters either?

(I'm running OD&D right now, and thirteen sessions into the campaign, the PCs' levels are already an asynchronous smear across the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd experience levels!)

No, all single-class. (somewhat by design; while you can multi-class in my game if you really want to, the system will fight you a bit unless you're in one of just a few combinations usually involving Thief). They've got a Fighter, Ranger, Thief*, MU, Druid^, and War Cleric.

* - who is going through 5th level for the second time, having been busted down to 4th during the first try.
^ - or close enough, we reshaped Druids into Nature Clerics many decades ago.

 

[Lyxen]

The fun maybe lies in overcoming those seemingly-impossible odds, hm?

The fact is that they are not seemingly-impossible, again I defy anyone to survive Ravenloft as written, the players need some sort of DM intervention, whether it's in terms of story, or additional help if only to deal with the level drain.

Most of 'em have a level range listed, and some suggest a total-levels amount as well. Keep in mind also that 1e parties were often much bigger than the now-standard 4 members.

That is true as well, I'm just looking at the level range on the covers.

1st-5th is too much, but 2nd-5th can work fine. 5th-9th is also fine.

OK, if you can make it work, good for you, it also depends heavily on magical equipment, always mattered a lot in AD&D.

In one game I play in the PCs currently range from 7th to 13th (mine is the 7th); in the other it's from 8th-13th (mine is 10th).

That seems a very wide range, but as long as everyone's having fun...

True. There's also level drain, level gain (e.g. via wish or decks of many things etc.), ability/willingness to train into a new level (if using 1e RAW), and a bunch of other factors to consider.

We had very little of these in our club, but we played so much that we had tons of characters to choose from anyway.

The characters in the party I'm DMing are, by sheer random chance, all currently 5th level; and I'm honestly not sure if I've ever otherwise DMed a party at that or higher level where everyone was the same. It won't last long, though; I think at least one of 'em is about to bump, probably next time I give out xp...

Exact same level is not important, but we really tried to keep XPs within a reasonable range, although equipment counted for a lot.

 

[Quartz]

Count me in the 'level drain is un-fun' category. At least in a long-term game. A one-shot horror is a different matter. For me, part of the problem is that short-range effects affect martial characters the most and you don't want to punish players for doing their thing. Fighters fight, so they're on the front line and get preferentially affected, and if they get hit with a level loss or some other long-term effect like Exhaustion or Proficiency Bonus loss that cannot be quickly corrected, that's seriously un-fun. Indeed any such effect is likely to lead to a party death spiral.

With regards to effects, I do like things like the banshee's wail because it affects the whole party equally, and I can tune the effects to suit the adventure.

 

[DarkCrisis]

I miss it. I miss the grit of AD&D. Probably why I’m goin got go back to it. 5E and it’s hand holding (3 saves to avoid being turned to stone? Etc) just seems really odd to me.

And I guess I never had a bad experience with Level Drain. Yeah it happened but nothing a NPC Cleric at the next big city couldn’t fix, just had to be ready to trade a magic item or 2 for the spell.