D&D 5E New Players same level as Current Players?

Iry said:

Please do not get hung up on the word 'Therapy'. Jester is the one who started using it.

Click to expand...

Sorry if that was misrepresentative of your position; I think the phrase you used was "help them psychologically".

Iry said:

Jester (and to a lesser extent, Ad_Hoc) seem to be arguing against doing so, on the grounds that it would interfere with the sandbox experience. I have been trying to convince them of all the positive benefits of doing so in moderation.

Click to expand...

The 'doing so' in this case being 'taking into account player preferences'.

No, at least in my case, I haven't been arguing against doing so. If that's all you meant when you talked about helping your players psychologically, we just have differing definitions of what we're talking about here. I don't see catering to my players' playstyles to be helping them psychologically OR to interfere with the sandbox experience. The ability to choose what to engage with means that the players who want (for instance) a heavy story element can choose to engage in some roleplaying/world background elements of the campaign and hold on tight. They'll get plenty of story by engaging the npcs and factions of the setting and dealing with their agendas.

Hiya!

Same level as the current players, b/c that's fair!

...not to the players who have been playing their asses off to get their characters to level 7!

Everybody always thinks in terms of "the new player" and how something would affect them; rarely does anyone ever think of the "old players" and how it will affect them. By just handing out unearned levels, it's, IMHO, nothing more than a slap in the face to the players that have 'worked hard' for their characters levels, items, equipment, etc.

So, my house rule is usually "Everyone starts at level 1", but with 5e I've changed it to "Everyone starts at the lowest PC's level, -2, with a max starting level of 3rd". IMHO, levels 1 and 2 go by so fast in 5e that they won't really even be noticed if the group is an average level of, say 4th or 5th. At the same time, starting at level 3 when everyone else is 5th or higher gives the starting PC an arch-type, decent HP's, and is likely to hit 4th quickly (and get all the goodies that level 4 grants a PC).

^_^

Paul L. Ming

After many different experiences and having run my own campaign under various rules, I have finally decided that I prefer to keep the characters at the same level, whether new players, old hands, casual and intermittent players or players who need to roll up new characters after their old ones died. Any bonus experience for journals, art, maps and other contributions is added to the experience of every character.

Faithful long-term play has its own rewards, such as knowledge of the world and its inhabitants, the pleasure of adventure and minor magical treasure. I am not comfortable with players who feel they deserve even more special treatment than that. New players feel enough awkwardness without having almost useless characters as well. Also, some players prefer to experiment with several different characters and classes, rather than stick with just one.

Furthermore, since it came up, I often let players rebuild or refluff their characters. We play for simple fun and for the story, not for competition or for thespian display (Although I can see the appeal of those things, none of us is particularly analytical or dramatically inclined).

geewaagh said:

Since the newbies don't know the world, area, etc., could be interesting to have the current players a mentors. Thoughts?

Click to expand...

The newbies don't know the world? What, did they just fall off the turnip truck? Don't penalize the characters for what the players don't know, but consider that player ignorance can filter into the game world if the GM (and other players) don't help the new players out.

For what it's worth, I just did the opposite of your suggestion in my game; I started a new player out as the mentor of the existing PCs. It requires a little more meta/abstract playing, like telling the new player what deep knowledge his character has when it might affect upcoming events (or present events), but can make for some fun situations.

For the (closed) poll: levels are basically a reward for playing, depending on the RPG. Starting new PCs at the level of the present PCs is telling the present PCs that they haven't earned much.

pming said:

Hiya!

Same level as the current players, b/c that's fair!

...not to the players who have been playing their asses off to get their characters to level 7!

Everybody always thinks in terms of "the new player" and how something would affect them; rarely does anyone ever think of the "old players" and how it will affect them. By just handing out unearned levels, it's, IMHO, nothing more than a slap in the face to the players that have 'worked hard' for their characters levels, items, equipment, etc.

So, my house rule is usually "Everyone starts at level 1", but with 5e I've changed it to "Everyone starts at the lowest PC's level, -2, with a max starting level of 3rd". IMHO, levels 1 and 2 go by so fast in 5e that they won't really even be noticed if the group is an average level of, say 4th or 5th. At the same time, starting at level 3 when everyone else is 5th or higher gives the starting PC an arch-type, decent HP's, and is likely to hit 4th quickly (and get all the goodies that level 4 grants a PC).

^_^

Paul L. Ming

Click to expand...

So, if I understand your position correctly....

The party have worked very hard for over a year of real life game time to get their characters from 1st to....15th. Well done them.

Now, somebody new wants to join. According to your post, they start at 3rd level. Why? Because it would be unfair to the existing players if the new guy started with 15 unearned levels....

Let me put myself into the head of one of those existing players. So, the team has worked so well as a unit that we managed to get to 15th. We achieved this because we worked as a team, and everyone pulled their weight. Now, we have to drag around a useless 3rd level appendage who can do nothing except soak up two attacks and then die, or hide in the back mooching the XPs we earn from now on?

That's not fair!

pming said:

...not to the players who have been playing their asses off to get their characters to level 7!

Everybody always thinks in terms of "the new player" and how something would affect them; rarely does anyone ever think of the "old players" and how it will affect them. By just handing out unearned levels, it's, IMHO, nothing more than a slap in the face to the players that have 'worked hard' for their characters levels, items, equipment, etc.

Click to expand...

Let me be a little controversial. If Player A considers it a slap in the face for Player B to start at the same level... start looking very closely at Player A to decide if they are worth keeping. That is not the kind of attitude you want to encourage in a cooperative social game.

My players would be furious if someone did not start at the same level as them. They would never dream of making the other player feel bad by forcing him to start at a lower level. On top of simple emotional reasons, they would not even want a lower level character to join the group if they had the choice. They would want the new character to be the same level so that they can contribute equally to the goals of the party.

The only exception would be a player who intentionally wanted to start at a lower level for some story-based reason.

Seramus said:

Let me be a little controversial. If Player A considers it a slap in the face for Player B to start at the same level... start looking very closely at Player A to decide if they are worth keeping. That is not the kind of attitude you want to encourage in a cooperative social game.

Click to expand...

Some tables are more "co-operative" than others.

You'd be looking long and hard at me, probably, as if I (and the other long-time players) have been earning my stripes in a game since day 1 I'd be a little peeved if every new character came in at the same level as we are. Including my own new characters; they have to earn their colours too.

A second and very pleasant side effect of bringing in new characters at a lower level: overall level advancement slows down, which makes the campaign last longer.

My players would be furious if someone did not start at the same level as them. They would never dream of making the other player feel bad by forcing him to start at a lower level. On top of simple emotional reasons, they would not even want a lower level character to join the group if they had the choice. They would want the new character to be the same level so that they can contribute equally to the goals of the party.

Click to expand...

The only time this "equality" becomes relevant is if you're looking at combat DPR optimization idiocies, for which I have no sympathy at all. Otherwise, any character can usefully contribute most of the time.

I'm not suggesting bringing in new ones at 1st level into a 8th-level party; but a level or two lower than the average is usually still solid enough to be relevant.

Lan-"unless someone wants to play a hench, which is a different ball o' wax entirely"-efan

Lanefan said:

You'd be looking long and hard at me, probably, as if I (and the other long-time players) have been earning my stripes in a game since day 1 I'd be a little peeved if every new character came in at the same level as we are. Including my own new characters; they have to earn their colours too.

Click to expand...

Your character has earned those stripes.
The character of a new player which is the same lvl as you has also performed deeds in the world to get where he/she is.

I also keep all my players at the same lvl.
After death of a previous character, if they miss a few session, if a new player joins, etc.

The only downside that I see is that a new player will have alot more abilities / skills to get used to when compared to starting at the lowest lvl.

Hiya!
[MENTION=6799649]Arial Black[/MENTION], and [MENTION=6812658]Seramus[/MENTION] ...to each his/her own I guess. With 5e's bounded accuracy, a 3rd level PC in an 8th level group isn't a problem, nor is it a problem in a 15th level group. As [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION] said, basically, combat is only 1/3rd of the game, after all. Also, DC's are rather static...so a 'difficult' lock to pick is DC 15 weather or not the PC is 3rd, 8th or 15th level. The Thief picking the lock may have +6, +8, or +10. Assuming an average roll of 10 on d20, all of them succeed. Yay bounded accuracy!

To me, simply handing out unearned levels only serves to foster system mastery...not play mastery. Personal anecdote: I used to run Tomb of Horrors for groups that kept on boasting about having 15th, 20th, 25th or higher level PC's. That they were "really expert gamers of AD&D" and that their DM's had to constantly make up new rediculous monsters and adventures to challenge them...because "they were so good". I'd happily let them take in their 25th level PC's into a level 10-14 module. Nobody ever got past "The Mouth". They had such munchkin PC's it was ridiculous; AC -19, 300hp's, 9 attacks per round with vorpal swords of life stealing speed, etc. All run by inexperienced players who were "given" levels...like starting off a new character at 15th level. One fond memory had a 25th level paladin (with munchkin equipment, stats, etc) die after falling into a pit with poison spikes and failing his save 30' into the corridor.

So, yeah, I don't think it's fair to the players who have managed to keep their characters alive and well, to just have a new PC show up with comparable levels. It also doesn't make sense from a campaign perspective; where are all these new 15th level PC's coming from, and where were they yesterday when the hoard of demon-spawn was attacking? How come the town is threatened by the "Two-Dozen-and-One Bandit Gang" when a pair of 15th level PC's were staying at the inn all along? No, that doesn't make any sense. For me and my group, these two major factors put us on the "*No Free Levels!" (*past level 3) side of the fence.


^_^

Paul L. Ming

If the goal is to "win" D&D by achieving the highest level possible before character death, then I can see people not wanting to "just be 11th level."

But for those arguing it's not fair for them to have "earned" 11 levels through play versus the new guy who is just automatically 11th level...

...those guys got to play the same character for 11 levels! THAT'S the reward. Newbie gets no experience like that; why punish her/him further?