D&D (2024) 2024 Player's Handbook Reveal: Feats/Backgrounds/Species

[mellored]

They are recommending you start at level 3? Yuck.

They added rules for starting at any level.

And probably added a paragraph about...

"Level 1 has less options and could be better for new players. More experienced players might wish to start at level 3 where they have more options to customize their characters."

Not forcing anyone to do anything.

 

[Belen]

There is a part in character creation that says that if you are experienced players it might be better to just start at lvl 3 so you can jump right in to where play starts to get fun.

Lvl 1 and 2 were only supposed to last for 1 maybe 2 gaming sessions each and are really just there so that you can get a feel for the basics of your class.

I use level 1-2 to establish the campaign and story.

 

[OB1]

While I do not think that high stars are a necessity I do agree that the +3 seems to be the breaking point between mostly hitting and mostly missing in the levels between 3-11. By 12 it feels like you need a +4 to keep up.

While it may seem that way at lower levels, the math in the DMG makes it clear.

Base AC for creating a monster CR 1/4-3 is 13. With a +0 to your main attack stat, you will hit 50% of the time, +2 60% and +3 65%. So it's clear that the game as designed requires only a +1 to you main attack stat to hit more often than you miss.

A CR12 Monster base AC is 17, and yes, a +4 is needed there to keep that 60% hit rate, so a +3 is the breaking point to hit more often than you miss.

And just to be clear, I'm not saying one way or another is the 'right' or 'preferred' way to play, I'm only examining why the designers are okay with choices existing that would prevent a player from getting a 65% chance to hit at level 1 (along with a host of choices that do allow you to hit that higher number). Like magic items, choosing a background at creation that gives you a 16 is a bonus over the baseline assumption of the game.

 

[mellored]

I use level 1-2 to establish the campaign and story.

You still can.

Some people want to jump right into the action. Or just want to run a dungeon crawl.

Also, sometimes characters die. So rules for making a new level 11 replacement are welcome.

 

[Chaosmancer]

They are recommending you start at level 3? Yuck.

They have recommended that for a while. In the original 2014 playtest, what we call level 3 was level 1. Bt many people felt it was too much for level one so levels 1 and 2 were added essentially.

 

[Micah Sweet]

There is a part in character creation that says that if you are experienced players it might be better to just start at lvl 3 so you can jump right in to where play starts to get fun.

Lvl 1 and 2 were only supposed to last for 1 maybe 2 gaming sessions each and are really just there so that you can get a feel for the basics of your class.

I thought levels 1 and 2 were kept as they were in 5.0 because experienced players wanted them, not in spite of them.

 

[Chaosmancer]

While it may seem that way at lower levels, the math in the DMG makes it clear.

Base AC for creating a monster CR 1/4-3 is 13. With a +0 to your main attack stat, you will hit 50% of the time, +2 60% and +3 65%. So it's clear that the game as designed requires only a +1 to you main attack stat to hit more often than you miss.

A CR12 Monster base AC is 17, and yes, a +4 is needed there to keep that 60% hit rate, so a +3 is the breaking point to hit more often than you miss.

And just to be clear, I'm not saying one way or another is the 'right' or 'preferred' way to play, I'm only examining why the designers are okay with choices existing that would prevent a player from getting a 65% chance to hit at level 1 (along with a host of choices that do allow you to hit that higher number). Like magic items, choosing a background at creation that gives you a 16 is a bonus over the baseline assumption of the game.

You might be misreading that chart though. Firstly because goblins (Cr 1/4) have an AC of 15, and Hobgoblins (CR 1/2) have an AC of 18.

Using your own numbers a +3 is a 55% to hit a Goblin and a 40% against a hobgoblin.

Why the disparity? Well, because they don't match their CR for one, using that chart hobgoblins have an offensive CR of 1/4, but a defensive CR of 5 (combining their low hp with high AC). But also you are ssupposed to take the average off their values.

Looking at actual statblocks most of the low level enemies with 13 AC also either hit like a truck, have tons of hp, or BOTH. Add in that people would prefer to grab feats that have cool effects instead of playing catch-up, and high AC enemies tend to have lower damage outputs making them safer to send against parties for the first 4 levels of play... and I would be surprised if the actual average AC groups face is closer to 14 or 15.

 

[WanderingMystic]

I thought levels 1 and 2 were kept as they were in 5.0 because experienced players wanted them, not in spite of them.

Nope the whole reason they moved the subclasses to 3rd was that they wanted new players to have an introduction to the class so it makes sense that they would say people who don't need that type of an introduction should skip them.

If your running a game and like them then keep them it's not a rule or anything just a suggestion.

I use level 1-2 to establish the campaign and story.

Usually what I like to do when I am running and some of my dms do the same is for that lvl 1-2 to be raped solo with the dm. To me those levels you really are still training, your wizard is still an apprentice learning how to become an evoker but is responsible enough to be sent out on small fetch quest, your rogue has just joined the guild or maybe is still trying to prove themselves to the guild. Also in the few games I have played where everyone started out knowing everyone else as kids it's shows us growing up.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Nope the whole reason they moved the subclasses to 3rd was that they wanted new players to have an introduction to the class so it makes sense that they would say people who don't need that type of an introduction should skip them.

If your running a game and like them then keep them it's not a rule or anything just a suggestion.


Usually what I like to do when I am running and some of my dms do the same is for that lvl 1-2 to be raped solo with the dm. To me those levels you really are still training, your wizard is still an apprentice learning how to become an evoker but is responsible enough to be sent out on small fetch quest, your rogue has just joined the guild or maybe is still trying to prove themselves to the guild. Also in the few games I have played where everyone started out knowing everyone else as kids it's shows us growing up.

Are you sure? I thought it was to maintain the "zero to hero" narrative fans of older editions enjoy.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Usually what I like to do when I am running and some of my dms do the same is for that lvl 1-2 to be raped solo with the dm. To me those levels you really are still training, your wizard is still an apprentice learning how to become an evoker but is responsible enough to be sent out on small fetch quest, your rogue has just joined the guild or maybe is still trying to prove themselves to the guild. Also in the few games I have played where everyone started out knowing everyone else as kids it's shows us growing up.

Yeah, generally if the group knows DnD and I want to start with a big plot right from session one, I'll start at either 3rd or 5th. 1st level is usually when I do my post-apocalpyse stories where "yesterday you were a used car salesman, now goblins are real and trying to eat your face" because level 1 gives a far more terrifying vibe in every single combat with how trivial it is to drop people.