What level to start at....
The_Universe
First Post
I like 1st level starters as a matter of course, but if I'm not running a game at first level, I almost always go to level 3 as a second choice.
Quasqueton
First Post
I am so god-awful tired and bored with low-level play, both as a DM and a Player (after 25 years of playing this game). 2nd level is the absolute minimum I can stand to DM or play. And after a couple campaign starts in my games at 2nd level, I've now determined I'd rather start at 3rd level. The PCs are still in the beginnings of their careers, but they are not fresh-faced kids right out of fighter/wizard/rogue/cleric school, with zero experience in their professions.
In my old AD&D1 campaigns, I started PCs at 3rd level, too. But then it was for survivability. Now it is for funability.
Quasqueton
In my old AD&D1 campaigns, I started PCs at 3rd level, too. But then it was for survivability. Now it is for funability.
Quasqueton
Snowy
Explorer
level 2 or 3 seem nice so people can multiclass if they want, level ones nice so you get a more evolved feel (but much easily available death on a stick), level 4 or 5 puts you above the average schmoes (gaurds and soldiers are level 1,2,3 fighters/barabrians/rogues no warriors here, (hee hee that looked like level 123 multiclassed barbarianfighterrogues before the commas and slashes, anyway)..... we did start a short lived campaign last easter at level 8? might have been higher even, that was fun, means we had a chance to fight weird and wonderful creatures be saviors of mankind (actually lizardman kind for me) and all sorts of stuff.
hmmmm as for the favourite. not a clue. I would have said 2 or 3 as thats what i started the campaign I'm running at so people could multiclass from the start if they wanted. But remembering the high level crazy play that was great as well.
Have fun anyway, I'm sure you will.
hmmmm as for the favourite. not a clue. I would have said 2 or 3 as thats what i started the campaign I'm running at so people could multiclass from the start if they wanted. But remembering the high level crazy play that was great as well.
Have fun anyway, I'm sure you will.
Stormborn
Explorer
1st or 3rd is a hard choice. But somethign you might want to consider is just a flat 1000 xp per session. 1 session to make it to 2nd, 2 more to make it to 3rd, etc. This will also alow you to change up game play and not be tied to XP by Combat Encounter. Which might make this game stand out a bit more to those players who are also playing in other low level games. Level 1 will help the newish players and this style might help it stand out from other games.
the Jester
Legend
I'm another strong proponent of starting at 1st level.
Philip
Explorer
Add my vote to the start at 1st group.
I really adds a sense of growth and accomplishment when you feel so fragile at first and even a single goblin seems dangerous and when you gain 2 levels later you can hardly believe you were so scared of the goblin.
Also, on 1st lvl characters can feel threatened by a farmer with a pitchfork etc. Once they're 3rd they can already boss around most of the populace.
I just like the type of encounters and obstacles you can put down at 1st level, which are gone in no time (Invisibility by 3rd lvl, Fly by 5th lvl anyone?)
I really adds a sense of growth and accomplishment when you feel so fragile at first and even a single goblin seems dangerous and when you gain 2 levels later you can hardly believe you were so scared of the goblin.
Also, on 1st lvl characters can feel threatened by a farmer with a pitchfork etc. Once they're 3rd they can already boss around most of the populace.
I just like the type of encounters and obstacles you can put down at 1st level, which are gone in no time (Invisibility by 3rd lvl, Fly by 5th lvl anyone?)
Bront
The man with the probe
I like 2nd level. Lets you multi-class a bit early, but you're still low. Give max HP for both levels for extra survivability (Definately not a gamebreaker) and go from there.
They only problem I've had with 1st level is there are a few concepts that don't quite work as well starting there (usually ones that involve multi-classing). Something about building the great fighter mage while being either not a fighter or not a mage at some point just sucks.
They only problem I've had with 1st level is there are a few concepts that don't quite work as well starting there (usually ones that involve multi-classing). Something about building the great fighter mage while being either not a fighter or not a mage at some point just sucks.
Quickbeam
Explorer
Start 'em at 1st and ramp them up quickly given the description you've provided. I see two primary benefits to this strategy:
1. The players will still have the chance to shape their PC's based on the experiences they actually encounter as opposed to those they may dream up for the backstory of a 4th level character, and
2. The mortality rate will be diminished with a faster level progression early on.
Good luck!!
1. The players will still have the chance to shape their PC's based on the experiences they actually encounter as opposed to those they may dream up for the backstory of a 4th level character, and
2. The mortality rate will be diminished with a faster level progression early on.
Good luck!!
Similar Threads
