Dragonlance "You walk down the road, party is now level 2."

[Paul Farquhar]

@MerricB touched on this above...but the most popular and widely played 5e adventures do not follow the pattern everyone is repeating here.

LMoP: You get ambushed by goblins, track them back to their lair, and have multiple fights in the lair, plus possibly avoiding being hit by a flood. Level 2: You explore a town with a fair amount to explore, learn of and fight a local gang, find their hidden lair, fight more of them, and then have some side quests. Level 3: More side quests, overland travel, then Cragmaw Castle, from which the local goblin-kin king rules. (The sidequests in level 2 or 3 can include a dragon that can also easily kill the party).

For CoS, the deathouse lives up to its name. The opening of the Tiamat one is also infamous.

I say go with the popular route. Use level 1 and 2 and don't hold back. Which are the best point to come up with a new character, before getting too invested.

I think most of us are saying the problem seems to be with more recent adventure paths. Specifically, those published after Rhyme of the Frostmaiden.

 

[MerricB]

I think most of us are saying the problem seems to be with more recent adventure paths. Specifically, those published after Rhyme of the Frostmaiden.

It's inconsistent throughout the edition. Some campaign adventures handle it well, others don't.

BTW: Rime not Rhyme.

 

[MerricB]

I have noticed that the recent WotC adventure paths I have used have terrible pacing if you use milestone levelling (my players choice, not mine), or a terrible difficulty curve if you don't. Examples: Witchlight, Neatherdeap. Worked okay: Frostmaiden. Perhaps a reason why the format seems to be somewhat on the way out?

Pacing is often an excellent reason to use story-based levelling. Relying on XP often means a lot of bloated encounter sections with encounter after meaningless encounter, just because you need to hit the XP budget. (You may be familiar with a few Paizo APs that fit that description).

When pacing falls down in a story-based levelling adventure, it's normally down to the overall adventure structure.

The trouble with using story-based levelling is that it doesn't reward side content very well. Wizards of the Coast (especially) have trouble with giving rewards. No magic items, no boons. Occasionally gold - but gold is mostly worthless in their campaigns.

I know my players are a lot more appreciative of doing side content and getting XP for it. It's tricky in the more linear adventure paths, because they can over-level.

But for a more non-linear experience like Drakkenheim or Curse of Strahd? Fantastic!

Tyranny of Dragons I think works best with story-based levelling. Curse of Strahd with XP.

Cheers!

 

[MerricB]

I recall that was the common wisdom handed down from the designers relatively soon after 5e's release- that levels 1 and 2 were for newer players, and 3 was good to start at if you had a handle on things. Level 3 characters are certainly a good bit more heroic than level 1 and 2 characters, who really do feel like "put down their pitchforks and picked up a sword" (after a few months training maybe).

I definitely value the pre-5 levels though.. it feels like it helps players grow with their characters, and also (possibly) teaches them caution.

Yeah. I like the early levels as well. (My joke was that even though I know level 1 is for newer players, I still like beginning there!)

Of course, I also run really long campaigns - my current Greyhawk campaign is with level 16 characters, and will be the third campaign in 5E I've run to level 20.

Cheers!

 

[Micah Sweet]

The gross majority of plays doesn't play those meatgrinder starting levels. I don't think that's anywhere close to what regular 5e play looks like these days.

In my own campaigns, I stretch or skip early levels to my liking. One thing that has significantly improved my verisimillitude is making the party "chosen by the gods", or "fated for greatness". This helps explain to me why they grow in power so fast.

I would much rather just change how fast they grow in power.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I say go with the popular route. Use level 1 and 2 and don't hold back. Which are the best point to come up with a new character, before getting too invested.

Problem: Plenty of people, such as yours truly, are already invested the moment you say, "Hey, I was thinking about running a D&D campaign."

I have several character ideas living in my head rent-free at any given time. The instant a DM says they want to run something, I'm already tinkering. By the time the rubber hits the road and we're actually playing, "getting too invested" is already fading to the horizon behind me.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Problem: Plenty of people, such as yours truly, are already invested the moment you say, "Hey, I was thinking about running a D&D campaign."

I have several character ideas living in my head rent-free at any given time. The instant a DM says they want to run something, I'm already tinkering. By the time the rubber hits the road and we're actually playing, "getting too invested" is already fading to the horizon behind me.

I can see that perspective. I have a lot of character ideas too, and get super-excited to play them. But that doesn't make me too invested to accept their death if that's how things go, because I have other character ideas too, and I can only play one at a time (usually).

 

[TwoSix]

I can see that perspective. I have a lot of character ideas too, and get super-excited to play them. But that doesn't make me too invested to accept their death if that's how things go, because I have other character ideas too, and I can only play one at a time (usually).

I think there's a happy medium where you can enjoy coming up with a concept, and fleshing out the mechanics and personality and backstory before session 1, but you don't get attached. The brainstorming should be the fun part.

I like making characters, but I'm not dropping $50 on a HeroForge mini for them, either. Characters are ultimately tools for the gameplay.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I can see that perspective. I have a lot of character ideas too, and get super-excited to play them. But that doesn't make me too invested to accept their death if that's how things go, because I have other character ideas too, and I can only play one at a time (usually).

I'm not saying absolutely 100% of people who have lots of character ideas will become as deeply invested as I am as quickly as I am. But it's something that has to be accounted for. Some players really will be sufficiently invested such that a death at level 2 would sour their experience. Others don't get that invested ever, even with a character they've carefully shepherded through 15+ levels of a brutal meatgrinder OSR game.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I think there's a happy medium where you can enjoy coming up with a concept, and fleshing out the mechanics and personality and backstory before session 1, but you don't get attached. The brainstorming should be the fun part.

I like making characters, but I'm not dropping $50 on a HeroForge mini for them, either. Characters are ultimately tools for the gameplay.

I mean, maybe that's a happy medium for you. I can't really do the brainstorming without the investment. That would be like asking me to write a sonnet praising a significant other's beauty, but to only think about it just enough to write it, not to actually care about it. I can't do that. I can't write poetry and not care about the subject or the expression; if I were to metaphorically "pull back" enough to ensure I didn't care, I would be mentally removing the resources necessary to write it in the first place.

Likewise, characters. For me, there is no such thing as choosing whether or not I'm invested. Either I draft an actual character, and am in fact actually invested as a direct consequence of having done so; or I don't draft an actual character, and therefore am not actually invested. A pile of descriptives and a stat array do not a character make, for the same reason that a pile of notes and ideas do not a novel make, or a gold nugget and raw diamond do not an engagement ring make. In each case, the former is certainly useful fuel for the latter! But they aren't actually the product. Naturally, I don't want a character that is perfectly prewritten, perfectly known and planned and fixed. I wish to discover them! But there's no value in the discovery if it's still just a pile of descriptives and a stat array. There is no life in such things. For me, only personal investment creates that life.