Does anyone have any experience with running campaigns starting at level 0, or where the adventurers start as commoners?

[Gavin O.]

Commoners riding in a carriage?

Carriage is the wrong word. I'm talking about... a wheeled thing a horse drags behind. I'm not sure what that's called. A cart? A buggy?

 

[MNblockhead]

Carriage is the wrong word. I'm talking about... a wheeled thing a horse drags behind. I'm not sure what that's called. A cart? A buggy?

"Carriage" should be fine, no? It is a broad term. Anyway, there is also:

TWO WHEELS
cab
cart
chariot

FOUR WHEELS
ambulance
coach
wagon
buggy
barouche (elegant carriage with a spot for a servant)
vardo ("gypsy wagon")

For more see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horse-drawn_vehicle

 

[darjr]

DCC funnels are awesome! The key to them imho is to have more than one and preferably four characters, second roll everything randomly. But no 4d6, 3d6 in order man. If any player runs out they can ask the other players if they would pass them one or more of their PC's.

I've run and played in DCC funnels and the weird thing is you get attached to the survivors in a cool way that builds background and a shared history from the get go. A dangerous shared history.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Carriage is the wrong word. I'm talking about... a wheeled thing a horse drags behind. I'm not sure what that's called. A cart? A buggy?

Wagon would carry the right connotation, I suppose...

 

[Leatherhead]

As much as I think that level 1 should be renamed level -1 (which makes level 3 the new level 1), I did get an idea from reading this:

What if, instead of being commoners, their Background was what kind of NPC they were playing as?

 

[Oofta]

I've done something similar, I've had several campaigns start out with the PCs as children. In 5E I'd probably take a -2 to all stats (maximum 12, I use point buy so minimum 6), you only get 1 proficiency from your background and the bonus is only a +1, no classes or feats. As children they don't have access to real armor so the best they can do is a heavy jacket for padded armor. Best weapon is a dagger or a club. No weapon or armor proficiency from racial abilities, PCs that were going to be spellcasters can cast cantrips but had to make arcana checks to get it right, etc.

It was a lot of fun, focused mostly on role-playing and level appropriate threats. The big bad monsters were the junkyard dog and clearing some rats out of a warehouse. Mostly it was fleshing out their characters and personalities to figure out what they were going to be and how they'd work together as a team while introducing the region and thoughts on the campaign. Many groups faced real danger and hit significant events that drove much of the rest of the campaign.

But it depends on your group. The powergamers tend to complain about it, the role players have a blast, but the majority of my players had fun. I didn't do it for my last campaign because I had several brand new players, but I would definitely do it again.

 

[Eltab]

I've played in game systems where you start out with nothing and have to build from scratch.
I prefer to start at L1 - you've done enough to decide that you are good at something (or better at some thing than at other things).

If I knew it was coming ahead of time, I would not mind the "you have nothing but the shirt on your back ... and maybe not even that" opening to a campaign. I'd be really unhappy if I spent an evening equipping my character and had it all taken away before play even began.

 

[TwoSix]

Create a commoner class. 1d8 HD, simple weapons, light armor, one proficient save, one skill. Every level they get an ASI (or feat). You can only take it for a few levels, like 3 or 4, then you have to multiclass into a regular class.

Have the different classes require feats and skills to get into, to show how the characters are growing into their adventuring careers. A wizard might require proficiency in Arcana, and the Ritual Caster feat. A fighter might require the Moderately Armored and Weapon Master feat.

 

[WarpedAcorn]

I'm working on a campaign where the adventurers start as commoners, who are dropped in a forest full of danger when the carriage they were riding in is ransacked by werewolves. I want the players to start weaker than a first-level character would be, to reflect that fact that they're not really adventurers and haven't learned how to fight. After the first session or two, after a few days or weeks of trying to survive, they can choose a class that reflects the fact that they've gained skill as an adventurer in the forest. First of all, do you think it's a good idea to do something like this, or should I just start my players off at level 1? Secondly, should they start as some generic "commoner" class with no abilities and get to choose a class later, or should they start with their classes but at level 0, with their proficiencies but no class features.

I recently did this and I thought it was great. I think the players liked it at the end, but they were NOT happy about playing as Commoners. Everything was "not fair" (which as the DM seeing the players squirm can be really entertaining).

What I did was give them all Skills, Abilities, and Equipment associated with their Backgrounds and Races, as well as a small selection based on what Class they wanted to be (Casters got 3 uses of their Cantrips and Warriors got 2 Weapon Proficiencies). For HP I went with the minimum they would have with their class, so 4 + Con Modifier. This is made them nervous.

The adventure took place over the course of 1 night, and they stumbled unto a plot to kill the King (who was a boy). The adventure was a lot more role-play and problem solving oriented, as the players had to figure out whether they were going to try and intervene, go to the authorities, or what. They started off essentially finding one of the would-be Assassins in an alleyway outside of the Tavern they were drinking at, along with a bunch of strange devices and a secret letter. The adventure progressed with the Players using a secret tunnel and navigating some skill checks. "Combat" Encounters were completely avoidable and they did the smart things with the Assassin's tools to avoid fighting the Rats and whatnot in the tunnels. There was a single combat encounter at the end, with 2 False-Guards wanting to kill the boy King and the Players having to hold them off until the real Guards arrived. The Casters got to use their spells here and the Warriors used the makeshift weapons they had picked up along the way.

Overall, I felt the game was super fun. It was only a few hours of gameplay long, but I felt the players had to think more than usual and for that reason I think they came out having a lot more fun (or at least a unique experience).

As a reward (since I did not assign XP), I gave the players the choice of: +1 Ability Point, 1 Proficiency in any Skill or Tool, 2 Languages, or a Favor with the Court. So everyone was able to get something unique that they would not have had a chance to otherwise in a standard game. And that is kind of my take home for running a Commoner-Style adventure, don't make it like a normal game. =)

 

[GMMichael]

The adventure was a lot more role-play and problem solving oriented, as the players had to figure out whether they were going to try and intervene, go to the authorities, or what. . .

Overall, I felt the game was super fun. It was only a few hours of gameplay long, but I felt the players had to think more than usual and for that reason I think they came out having a lot more fun (or at least a unique experience).

This. If you're going to take away PCs' durability, you'd better replace it with non-combat situations.

But really, shouldn't every game have role-playing, problem-solving, super fun, and thinking? Or is this type of play reserved for special situations only, like pre-level-one characters?