D&D 5E Followup on "Everyone Starts at First Level"

[Ahrimon]

Mathematically, it wouldn't matter if your game was slow or fast, unless the DM gave the 1st level character a smaller share of the XP, or used some other DM-based method of limiting player progression, then the first time a 1st-level player was involved in say, a 5th-level fight, he'd shoot up 2 levels by almost any experience table. Slow leveling or not.

You're making the mistake of assuming that the experience table and awards are set in stone. If the DM was handing out 50% or 20% experience it would take several combats and adventures for that character to reach 4th or 5th. And don't forget that many games level at DMs discretion. So a new character could experience several adventures worth of experience before he's beginning to catch up to the others.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Pardon me if I'm wrong, but isn't XP gain continuous? That is, the values in the table for how much XP to level are set values (you're level 6 when you've earned 14000 XP, and having hit level 5 you're already at 6500 XP) rather than an addition on top of the previous value (you need to earn 14000XP after hitting level 5 before hitting level 6)?

Yes, it is continuous. You are correct. Good catch.

 

[Sunseeker]

...at which point the new guy has helped take down two beholders, six unber hulks, a vampire, and a hundred gnolls. He's still the "new guy" but he's no longer a rookie. He's seen some things.

That's pretty different from a brand-new 10th level character showing up out of nowhere.

I don't understand this dichotomy you've established between "experienced 10th level character" and "new 10th level character". Is this going back to your premise that nothing weird, epic or exciting can happen to anyone other than the party? Something founded on some unsubstantiated claims of human psychology? Because I reject that claim pretty resoundingly.

Pardon me if I'm wrong, but isn't XP gain continuous? That is, the values in the table for how much XP to level are set values (you're level 6 when you've earned 14000 XP, and having hit level 5 you're already at 6500 XP) rather than an addition on top of the previous value (you need to earn 14000XP after hitting level 5 before hitting level 6)?

Yes, it is continuous. You are correct. Good catch.

Is it? I read through the section on XP in the PHB (if this is explained in the DMG, I did not get a chance to read it over last night while posting) and there was no indication of it being continuous. I have always "reset to zero" when I run XP, which admittedly I don't do often.

You're making the mistake of assuming that the experience table and awards are set in stone. If the DM was handing out 50% or 20% experience it would take several combats and adventures for that character to reach 4th or 5th. And don't forget that many games level at DMs discretion. So a new character could experience several adventures worth of experience before he's beginning to catch up to the others.

Well, if we start including games were players level at DM discretion then there's not really much to discuss since whimsy has no foundational backing.

 

[TwoSix]

...since whimsy has no foundational backing.

If you dig down very deep in your soul, you'll be able to summon your Patronus and banish those ever-present Dementors.

 

[the Jester]

Precisely. You worked around it. You did not use it as advertised.

"Everyone Starts at First Level" is exactly what he is doing. He is doing it exactly as advertised.

 

[KarinsDad]

"Everyone Starts at First Level" is exactly what he is doing. He is doing it exactly as advertised.

This must be the Common Core interpretation of ES@1 when the players stop playing their high level PCs and all but one of them restart with PCs at first level.

 

[the Jester]

In the interest of fairness, I thought that I should mention that I recently had my first complaint about ES@1 from a player, although I'm not sure that the real issue was the starting at first level vs. my having really, really hot dice (and the pcs just... not having good dice, at all).

First off, the player in question had his pc die when he was caught in a massive spray of acid from a horrible monster. That pc wasn't 1st level, though, and died by virtue of very low hit points (Con was either 7 or 9) and the fact that the pcs were fighting a monster above all of their level... they almost tpked there.

The player's replacement pc was a warlock. 8 hp. He, a 3rd level ranger and a 5th level paladin were doing some dungeoneering and ran into a group of four orcs.

And I rolled amazingly well. And they didn't.

The paladin's AC is 17, IIRC, and I never missed him. The pcs, OTOH, rolled poorly, made some bad tactical decisions and just didn't have any luck at all. The warlock used a witch bolt on an orc, who dropped him with a single javelin. Then, while the paladin and ranger kept on missing or doing pretty minimal damage, the warlock failed his first death save... and rolled a 1 on the next one.

In the end, the ranger and paladin both went down, too, but they were captured, not killed.

So the player was burnt (understandably, I think- it sucks to lose two pcs in one session), and complained about the "ES@1" policy. I'm not entirely sure that was the cause, but I definitely sympathize with him.

OTOH this game did convince me that witch bolt isn't as cool as I thought, since you're limited to a "come and kill me" kind of range.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I don't understand this dichotomy you've established between "experienced 10th level character" and "new 10th level character". Is this going back to your premise that nothing weird, epic or exciting can happen to anyone other than the party? Something founded on some unsubstantiated claims of human psychology? Because I reject that claim pretty resoundingly.

I noticed. If you're looking for someone to force you to play differently, you won't find that person in me. If you find that your table loves detailed offstage backstories and listens to them without complaint, or loves high-level characters without a backstory explaining how they reached high level (in your rebuttal, "he was there at the PCs' battle but didn't really do much" doesn't explain how he went from 5th to 10th level just from watching), game on.

If "I don't understand" is code for "I want you to persuade me that", I'm not interested in playing that game.

 

[the Jester]

This must be the Common Core interpretation of ES@1 when the players stop playing their high level PCs and all but one of them restart with PCs at first level.

The definition- the only definition- of ES@1 is "everyone starts at 1st level". That's it. He's doing exactly that, and the fact that some of the players made secondary characters is only relevant in that they, too, started at first level.

ES@1 games do work best- as I think I have acknowledged in both this and the original thread on the topic- in troupe-style play with lots of players, many of whom sometimes have multiple pcs in the setting at once. That doesn't mean everyone necessarily switches pcs whenever a new pc comes in, but it means that, eventually, most players have a couple of characters at fairly widely separated levels to choose from for a given adventure. And often, when a new 1st level character comes in, the group will play mostly low-level pcs alongside him or her. That's one way to do ES@1. It's not the only way, but it's probably one of the more common.

 

[KarinsDad]

Well, if we start including games were players level at DM discretion then there's not really much to discuss since whimsy has no foundational backing.

Except that playing without using experience and leveling at DM discretion is a fairly common staple at many D&D tables. The DMG explains how to do it on page 261.

His point is valid.