D&D General Boredom in "Zero to Hero" Campaigns

[Richards]

Here's a random thought: for those of you tiring of the "zero to hero" situation, how about turning it around for a change? Start up a campaign where the PCs start out powerful (however high you decide is powerful enough: 12th level maybe, or heck, maybe even 20th) and somehow trigger a curse (maybe by ticking off a deity? - you decide). From that point on, track XP in reverse; as they run through more and more encounters, they lose XP and eventually start dropping in level. This would have to be different than mere standard level loss - it can't be reversed with a restoration spell or whatever. Now the PCs have a definite goal: find out how they triggered the curse and how to go about getting it reversed...all while every bit of combat removes XP and gets them closer and closer to losing yet another level. And as formerly powerful PCs, they'll have made similarly powerful enemies, who they'll now need to try to avoid. Heck, they'll have to start deciding whether any particular given combat is worth the potential subsequent drop in level. And yet, as the world still believes them to be the movers and shakers - literally the best at what they do - they'll still be getting requests to do the things that need getting done.

It would probably get really irritating for the players if you to tried to stretch this over a full campaign (more or less in reverse), but it could be an interesting way to start off a campaign in a completely different manner. And whatever level the PCs are at when they finally manage to reverse their curse, that's where they'll start back up at gaining levels like normal...only with their previous powerful enemies just as powerful as they ever were.

I don't know if this is even anything other than just a stray thought that popped into my brain upon seeing the phrase "zero to hero."

Johnathan

 

[Haldrik]

Tiers correspond well to genres.

Student tier 0, 1-4: is like Harry Potter. Many "realistic" genres, like Westerns, are also this tier.
Professional and Master tiers 5-8, 9-12: are probably the sweet spot that is quintessentially D&D.
Official tier 13-16: is the place to focus on running governments, mass combat, and so on.
Legend and possibly Immortal tiers 17-20, 21-24: are the superhero genre, albeit the superhero feel can start in Official tier.

Decide the genre. Select the appropriate tier. It is ok to advance slowly or not at all if preferring to savor the feel of a particular tier.

 

[Asisreo]

I don't see what's wrong with the prophecy storyline. You aren't great, but you're destined to be greater than any of the heroes before.

Honestly, most D&D characters get very strong very quickly. While they may spend a week at tier 1, they'll be in tier 2 from a month to a year and tier 3 from a year to a couple of years.

This is massive amounts of growth. Going from struggling with rats to taking down adult dragons within a few years time is an incredibly breakneck pace. One appropriate for someone destined for greatness.

It's possible to have the looming threat of something only the PC's can handle a decade from now. Make it seem distant while also imminent and urgent. Something they constantly know is coming. The tale of going from the guys who's hands were too unsteady to cast firebolt reliable to being able to summon meteors from the sky is epic.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I don't see what's wrong with the prophecy storyline. You aren't great, but you're destined to be greater than any of the heroes before.

There's nothing wrong with it once in a great while IMO. I don't expect every PC to be destined for greatness personally.

How long you spend in each tier depends a lot on the table IME, but I agree growth is usually very fast in terms of overall perspective.

I remember in 2E I ran a campaign that took 5 years IRL, with the characters going to level 15-18 or so. Their very first random encounter was with an age 10 green dragon, named Malandasar. It wasn't until 15 years later in game time when the character finally returned to defeat the dragon (the end of the campaign). Funny thing was, it was a randomly rolled encounter, the dragon wasn't planned at all.

This group, literally, was one of the parties that went to Hell and back, journeyed to see the elven gods, etc. build castles and claimed lands, had families, and much, much more. Probably the best campaign I've run, or maybe second-best... hard to choose.

 

[Raith5]

I will only ever start at level 1 and I absolutely hate how 5e basically skips over levels 1-2, and slow the pace waaaaaaaay down through level 5.

100% agree. I love heroic play of higher level 5e and 4e but there is something special in the types of adventures you can have in lower level D&D. It is waste to a) makes these levels essentially a throwaway and b) so brief.

 

[Ancalagon]

Don't pull your punches at level 1 - have the PCs encounter goblins, a bassiliks and a lich.

You think I'm kidding? Look up Tomb of the Serpent King.

Play the GLOG.
Once a PC reach level 5, they can retire. New PCs start at level 1. Oh, the 3rd level barbarian died in the dungeon? Look at that, a lost first level PC willing to join? Why is there a lost first level PC in the dungeon? There's a table for that!

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Like, what harm would there be in having the low-level characters start off their careers special?

No harm - I do it frequently. But it means putting constraints on initial player options. You can't be "Thudd the Barbarian from the outer wastes" when the campaign begins with the PCs as diplomats working in the Royal Cormyrian embassy.

Published adventures have to start as generic as possible, to accommodate PCs with any potential background. And when they do something differently, as in Out of the Abyss, there are complaints about the constraints placed on characters.

It's really outside of the purview of published adventures - there is plenty of material in other sourcebooks. It's the responsibility DM to come up with an enaging campaign hook tailored to the players.

 

[reelo]

@LanefanWhy is D&D so afraid to make early characters feel important, powerful, essential to the campaign world?

Because maybe they shouldn't be? Zero to hero is more compelling than hero to super-hero, at least in my book.
Heroes are the ones that survive the first couple of levels.

 

[ccs]

Play the GLOG.

?? What's a real life company who supplies natural gas got to do with any of this?

 

[Guest 6801328]

Funny, me reaction to the thread title was to assume it mean you get to "hero" too quickly.

I never get bored with level 1-3, but as I get closer to 10 it starts to feel too gonzo for me.