D&D 5E Levels 1-4 are "Training Wheels?"

[payn]

The (a) trap around every corner or the GM's a pushover and (b) always looking for the best xp move are different issues.

There's nothing wrong with (a) as a guiding principle. There is an issue with (b) if it changes too much or too often what the charcters would otherwise reasonably do.

Interesting. I know some players who I think in such a case would largely stop trying, or stop trying as hard, as the incentive is gone. I might even be one myself, won't know until-unless I'm in that situation.

Really depends what you want from the game. Couple times a year I play in a DCC tournament style game my buddy likes to run. Its pure skill play and stay alive as long as you can. Very gamey and very fun. This isnt what I want out of a long campaign though. I want to explore a character, see them arc, influence a world, solve mysteries, etc.. Using XP pushes the game too much into the game side of the RPG for me. Nothing wrong with folks who like that, also folks can do both, but doesn't usually work out with me and mine.

 

[Oofta]

When it comes to DMing, I don't want to incentivize players to have their PCs to do anything the players think their PC would do. Other than "if your PC is evil they become an NPC" I want to leave the decisions they make up to what people think they would do. If they think their PC would be cautious, they're cautious. If they're overly cautious then a delay could mean a missed opportunity.

My preference is not to have metagame carrots and sticks, I'd rather motivation comes completely from the perspective of the character inhabiting the world.

 

[Lyxen]

My preference is not to have metagame carrots and sticks, I'd rather motivation comes completely from the perspective of the character inhabiting the world.

Exactly, the players motivations should be to play the game, not "winning it" by accumulating XPs or other game artefacts. As I run story-oriented games, I'm not interested by these kind of players, because they have a tendency to have game-driven objectives rather than story/roleplaying ones. Let's not mix character objectives and players objectives.

I want players to enjoy the game for what it is, not because I use sticks or carrots.

 

[Vaalingrade]

The party can pat each other on the back all they like but how does that do anything for their standing in the community at large?

It works as soon as a player in-character forces it to work, as follows:

Player-as-PC: "Hey, guys, I've got this extra magic sword. Falstaffe, you want it? Gimme 500 gold and it's yours!"
Falstaffe: "Thanks but no, I've got this enchanted mace which does me just fine. Never did get on with swords all that well."
PC: "OK. I wonder what I can sell it for in town?"
DM: "It has no monetary value."
PC: "Hell yes it does - I'll take it to the local mercenaries' hangout and offer it around, see what offers I can get for it. If nothing there I'll take it to the local temples, even to the palace if it comes to that. Someone's gotta want a magic sword badly enough to pay me for it - it's not like they grow on trees!"

Man, I hate the insistence that there's no such thing as 'magic marts'.

If there's nothing people won't buy or sell. There have been sellers of mummies (for eating!), military weaponry, and islands with storefronts and everything. IF magic items were a thing maybe they wouldn't be stored on premises, but there WOULD be a catalogue.

 

[Monayuris]

Man, I hate the insistence that there's no such thing as 'magic marts'.

If there's nothing people won't buy or sell. There have been sellers of mummies (for eating!), military weaponry, and islands with storefronts and everything. IF magic items were a thing maybe they wouldn't be stored on premises, but there WOULD be a catalogue.

Magic items have always been a boutique industry in my campaigns. You can buy a magic item but it is by brokerage (you need to make the right contacts, spend gold and wait the time set up the deal) and you can't special order the exact item you want.

You might be able to commission a high level mage to craft the exact item you want, but you would have to find a mage and convince them to spend the time and effort to do so (which usually would require quite a lot of gold, some heavy role-playing, and probably would need to perform some tasks for the mage). It would also take the time it would take to craft the item.

I mostly am against the magic item convivence shop. I remember how ridiculous it was when we had magic item shops back in 3e days; when we used to 'custom order' +2 fire brand, ghost touch long swords like we were ordering from a catalog and they'd go in the back and get it for us.

 

[HammerMan]

Last night a player commented: "Levels 1-4 are just training wheels. The game doesn't even start until 5th level. Unless you're playing D&D for the first time, you should just start at 5th level."

Now, she hasn't been playing for ages - probably just around 5 years. I would expect it to take longer than that to become that jaded to low-level play.

Do you agree? If not, how do you address this? Start at 5th level? Speed through Levels 1-4? House rules to give more power or better options?

1st a lot of 5e (and 4e before that) is all training wheels and padding. levels 1 and 2 are condescending parents running along side WITH the training wheels still on.

Tbh if we moved almost everything down a few levels the game would feel much better.

make 5th level martial classes 1st level (with 3HD but the features like SA and EA) then have spell casters start at level 3 (so full casters 2nd level spells and 1/3 casters having some spells) with3HD I think it would be great...

 

[J.Quondam]

Man, I hate the insistence that there's no such thing as 'magic marts'.

If there's nothing people won't buy or sell. There have been sellers of mummies (for eating!), military weaponry, and islands with storefronts and everything. IF magic items were a thing maybe they wouldn't be stored on premises, but there WOULD be a catalogue.

Yeah... In magic starved settings, discovering and navigating market for magic is a viable aspect of a campaign. It wouldn't ever be taken for granted, though, would certainly involve LOTS of complications, and might not even operate in regular currency.

Delving into the "magic mart" in such a setting should be as much an adventure as delving into a dungeon.

 

[Oofta]

In my campaign I assume that magic items are bought and sold because most magic items last forever unless explicitly destroyed. Throw a regular sword into a lake and a couple of years later it's rust. A magic sword? Just waiting for someone to come along so they can claim it from gal who happened to find it while taking a swim.

Most uncommon items can be purchased, although there is a chance it may not be available immediately or not at all. Items with greater rarity have less of a chance of being available although it does happen. There is no magic item treadmill though, and it's rare that a magic item is built to order.

It just never made sense to me that the PCs could go out, find magic items and sell them but never be able to purchase anything.

 

[Lanefan]

Because they relate the exploits of others to NPCs, of course. Our parties usually have a bard, or a paladin, or both, very communicative folks. In our Odyssey of the Dragonlords, we have a ship full of NPCs including multiple bards, and the goddess of Music to do our PR, as Fame and Prestige are tracked stats.

We've had - and have still - a few characters who are really big on the self-promotion piece. The rest of us either ignore them or laugh at them, most of the time.

I rearranged the order of some of the quoted bits below to put like things together.

Except that the principle of 5e (you might like it or not) is that there is simply no market for items, not enough items on the market, not enough buyers, not enough communication means and, even more importantly, not enough trust that it will not be stolen at one point or another.

I guess I should ask: is it your general assumption that the PCs are the only active adventurers in the setting? That can make a big difference here; and I always assume there's other adventurers out there willing to do, or try doing, what the PCs don't or won't or can't. (and if there's no other adventurers out there, where do replacement PCs or henches come from?)

"I'm sorry, I won't accept that estimate, the value from three people who are little bit more than brigands does not mean anything to adventurers like us".

The designers and I don't agree. What gives you the impression that showing a sword to a few mercenaries will give you an estimate of the value of such specific items to high level adventurers ? It's just as dumb.

Terminology mix-up perhaps. When I say a mercenaries' hangout I'm referring to the warrior equivalent of a Thieves' or Wizards' guild or Clerics' temple - i.e. the sort of place where other adventuring types can and often will be found. Put another way, the same sort of places you'd go if your party was looking to recruit a replacement Fighter, or hire a sneaky type as a hench.

With this, showing the sword around these sort of places will put it in front of other adventurers who will have at least a vague idea of what such a sword would be worth to them and who thus might make an offer for it.

We have been running 5e for maybe 20 campaigns since we started, not one with monetary value for items, although there was trading, and it went absolutely fine.

Another trivially easy way to determine an item's in-setting value is to take it to an artificer and ask "If I wanted another one just like this, how much would it cost to have you make it for me?" Whatever the answer is, boom, there's your item's base value.

And at the same time, none of our DMs are that one-sided and stupid, so we don't have that problem either.

That right there tells me your DMs aren't being truly neutral arbiters when running the game, which raises a very large red flag.

That is a house rule, good for you if it works.

Only partly; 1e had training by RAW, we've just modified how it works.

Well, it's not the case at our tables, and we think our collective and collaborative play is much better for it (once more, not preventing discussions and dissenssions, but focussing on heroic things and plans).

I'd love to try playing a character at your table*. Not sure how long I'd last at it and I'd probably upset a few apple carts along the way, but it's be all entertainment all the time as long as it lasted.

* - though despite being Canadian I speak virtually no French, and I seem to recall you're in France...?

 

[Lanefan]

Really depends what you want from the game. Couple times a year I play in a DCC tournament style game my buddy likes to run. Its pure skill play and stay alive as long as you can. Very gamey and very fun. This isnt what I want out of a long campaign though. I want to explore a character, see them arc, influence a world, solve mysteries, etc.. Using XP pushes the game too much into the game side of the RPG for me. Nothing wrong with folks who like that, also folks can do both, but doesn't usually work out with me and mine.

Fair enough. My own experience is that xp - usually given out at the start or end of a session and not every session by any means - represents what amounts to a short bookkeeping break from play: I give 'em out (and am often corrected by the players as to who should get what, or reminded of things I've missed), the players add 'em up, we see if anyone has bumped and deal with that, then we get on with the game.