Why do levels one and two suck so bad?

[Emirikol]

Why do players hate levels 1 and 2 so much? As a DM, I've found it crucial to develop much of a characters future in the first couple levels, yet players just can't wait to get past it to get to the "good levels."

I'm debating on how long to drag out levels 1 and 2 now considering that my campaigns dont' typically go past 12th anymore. I'm considering making it 4-5 DUNGEON adventures to get out of first level as a change of pace from the "let's dance to epic tomorrow" concept.

How do the rest of you do it? 1-2 adventures and move on? Why do players hate it so much?

jh

 

[VirgilCaine]

I don't have a lot of money starting out, so I can't afford a lot of things that would make adventuring a little easier. You have to pinch and scrimp and account for every little copper.

As a DM, I would think it's hard to make adventures for essentially, caravan guards.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Why do players hate levels 1 and 2 so much? As a DM, I've found it crucial to develop much of a characters future in the first couple levels, yet players just can't wait to get past it to get to the "good levels."

I'm debating on how long to drag out levels 1 and 2 now considering that my campaigns dont' typically go past 12th anymore. I'm considering making it 4-5 DUNGEON adventures to get out of first level as a change of pace from the "let's dance to epic tomorrow" concept.

How do the rest of you do it? 1-2 adventures and move on? Why do players hate it so much?

jh

Ever played a 1st-level mage? You might have only three spells. You cast Mage Armor (better hope a combat encounter occurs during that one hour) and then you can cast two other spells that day. That's all. You're not going to last one encounter, and will have to fire crossbow bolts at stuff. Many fantasy series give mages weak but "cheap" attacks that you can cast all day and so give you something to do when you run out of mana, but not in DnD.

A 1st-level rogue can't take Weapon Finesse (without house rules). They don't get good until 3rd-level. It's a bit frustrating when you achieve surprise or even flank but still can't hit anything (at least not without a bow, and you can't flank with one).

A 1st-level fighter has almost the opposite problem. They're uber, but even they have trouble with attack rolls. A 1st-level NPC fighter could have an AC score of 21; the PC fighter might have an attack bonus of +4 to +6 (Strength 14 or Strength 16 with masterwork weapon). A 1st-level fighter has a really good chance of being dropped in one hit by, say, a 1st-level orc barbarian, or even from a crit from an ordinary 1st-level orc warrior wielding a greataxe. Other characters would be hit far harder.

This might be my experience, based on the way I pick spells, but I find 1st-level clerics to be extremely boring. What good attack spells do you have?

A 1st-level monk... a joke. Enjoy your AC 14, backliner.

Less about rules and more about role, adventurers can't operate in certain areas at 1st-level. What sense does it make to fight crime in a city where the city watch already has its own 1st-level fighters, wizards and so forth?

 

[00Machado]

Because your character can be killed by dire rats and thrown rocks? I'd say it's tough to be/play, or at least to feel heroic when your character is so fragile.

 

[Cameron]

Ever played a 1st-level mage? You might have only three spells. You cast Mage Armor (better hope a combat encounter occurs during that one hour) and then you can cast two other spells that day. That's all. You're not going to last one encounter, and will have to fire crossbow bolts at stuff. Many fantasy series give mages weak but "cheap" attacks that you can cast all day and so give you something to do when you run out of mana, but not in DnD.

A 1st-level rogue can't take Weapon Finesse (without house rules). They don't get good until 3rd-level. It's a bit frustrating when you achieve surprise or even flank but still can't hit anything (at least not without a bow, and you can't flank with one).

A 1st-level fighter has almost the opposite problem. They're uber, but even they have trouble with attack rolls. A 1st-level NPC fighter could have an AC score of 21; the PC fighter might have an attack bonus of +4 to +6 (Strength 14 or Strength 16 with masterwork weapon). A 1st-level fighter has a really good chance of being dropped in one hit by, say, a 1st-level orc barbarian, or even from a crit from an ordinary 1st-level orc warrior wielding a greataxe. Other characters would be hit far harder.

This might be my experience, based on the way I pick spells, but I find 1st-level clerics to be extremely boring. What good attack spells do you have?

A 1st-level monk... a joke. Enjoy your AC 14, backliner.

Less about rules and more about role, adventurers can't operate in certain areas at 1st-level. What sense does it make to fight crime in a city where the city watch already has its own 1st-level fighters, wizards and so forth?

A Human Monk with VoP can have a better AC than the Fighter

AC of 21 would be difficult/impossible with NPC gold limits.

My players generally find that at level 1-3, the best tactic to overcome encounters is "run away!!!"

 

[Nifft]

Why do players hate levels 1 and 2 so much?

Because you're not playing Star Wars Saga Edition?

I really love what they did with 1st level.

Cheers, -- N

 

[EvilGM]

In the latest campaign I'm running, the PCs received 1/10 average starting gold for their class, and they get 1/100 experience for combat, but they do receive exp for roleplaying, ideas, humor, snacks, attending and other stuff - to the tune of 10xp per instance. Most experience comes from story awards and quest completion.

Ya, some of the players would like to advance quicker, but they are getting to know their characters better and fully develop them. They realize when they finally get to 5th level, they will be heroes of old in this world.

The campaign before that we played a high-powered gestalt game. They were probably averaging a level every session or three. A much different game.

 

[T. Foster]

As a guideline, it should take a group of players from 6 to 12 adventures before any of their characters are able to gain sufficient experience to attain second level. This guidelining will hold true for successive levels. Note that it is assumed that the 6 to 12 adventures are ones in which a fair amount of treasure was brought back - some 10% to 20% of adventures will likely prove relatively profitless for one reason or another

That said, I don't follow this guideline and never have. Typically the quick-advancement characters (clerics, thieves) will hit 2nd level after 3-4 sessions, everybody else will follow shortly thereafter so that by about 6 sessions pretty much everyone will be 2nd level and the clerics and thieves will be nearing 3rd, and so on. I can see the above guideline being used in a different style of campaign, though -- one with more frequent, shorter sessions (perhaps 2-3 sessions a week but each one only being ~2 hours) and with a higher mortality rate (note that it says it should take a group of players 6-12 sessions to hit 2nd level, not necessarily a group of characters -- by the 9th or 10th session some players may be on their 5th or 6th character (or more -- read some OD&D or Classic D&D Campaign Logs and you'll see some players going through 3 or 4 characters in a single session!)).

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

A Human Monk with VoP can have a better AC than the Fighter

Fine. Core rules then. A monk with VoP is really pushing game balance anyway.

AC of 21 would be difficult/impossible with NPC gold limits.

A 1st-level NPC has more gold than a 1st-level PC, and can have a heroic Dex score too with lighter armor.

My players generally find that at level 1-3, the best tactic to overcome encounters is "run away!!!"

That's a great way to heroically earn XP. They'll have a hard time with that, anyway, due to poor skill checks or, for that matter, doing anything clever that requires dice rolls.

 

[Olaf the Stout]

I don't really mind playing a first or second level character that much. A lot of people don't like the fragility and randomness of them though. One lucky hit can kill a character and hitting and missing relies much more on the luck of the d20 roll compared to later levels.

You are also limited for options at low levels since your character has very few feats, spells or class abilities to use. I have never played a 1st level Wizard but I imagine only having 3 spells to cast would be a little frustrating, especially if you use them all up in the first encounter or two.

Olaf the Stout