0 Level Character Rules are up

[Balesir]

Well, it becomes a problem with the design assumptions of the game. The damage of brutes and artillery takes into account the fact that there is a leader available, for instance. I could not use those monsters, but that puts limits on my ability to imagine awesome adventures for the party, which isn't great.

I think you are overestimating the "need" for specific roles in 4E. I DM for a party of seven that has no Leader; two Fighters (one of whom is multiclassed a bit into Cleric, I admit), a Paladin, a Ranger, a Rogue, a Warlock and a Wizard. I use all types of monsters, with XP budgets scaled up for a seven character party, and it works just fine. Do the players need to understand their weaknesses and work to cover them? Yes, but I find that a thoroughly good thing.

Two aspects of 4E stand out for me as regards roles: party design trumps character design and party tactics trump character "combos". Roles feed into these features, and yet do not make the game prescriptive in terms of party mix. I find this a peerless achievement.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

But I'm kind of with DracoSuave. I think what the game needs is an actual "normal tier."

1-10 Normal
11-20 Heroic
20-30 Epic

4e isn't set up to do that, and aside from introducing 10-level "negative classes" that all try to fit a design space of about a hairs breadth, there's no real way to play in that frame...

How about:

1-5 Normal
6-15 Heroic (gain big "Heroic tier bump at 10)
16-25 Paragon (gain big Paragon tier bump at 20)
26-30 Epic (ascend at 30)

Strictly from the perspective of useful pacing in a fantasy RPG, I'd find that a better mix. It's hard to cram in 10 levels of normal or epic stuff. So don't try. And if someone wants to center play on the heart of heroic or the heart of paragon, they still have plenty of levels to mess around with. If you want to start a zero and then stop around a 3.5 "E6" level, you can play levels 1-10. Being a big "hero" only the last half of that, should work.

And if you really do want to play zero to god-like, over the full range offered by the game, you'll get more natural "bumps" in the pacing, with that kind of scheme. Cramming the existing 30 levels into levels 6-30 should remove the last remants of "dead level" feeling (from substandard options), and it wouldn't be that hard to parse out 5 levels getting to the power of the current 1st.

 

[Gaming Tonic]

I think you are overestimating the "need" for specific roles in 4E. I DM for a party of seven that has no Leader; two Fighters (one of whom is multiclassed a bit into Cleric, I admit), a Paladin, a Ranger, a Rogue, a Warlock and a Wizard. I use all types of monsters, with XP budgets scaled up for a seven character party, and it works just fine. Do the players need to understand their weaknesses and work to cover them? Yes, but I find that a thoroughly good thing..

I couldn't agree more. One thing that stands out in 4e is that you can get by with creative players and quality character design. Know the flaws of your party and do your best to minimize them. For example a party of five human ranger beastmasters who spent all their feats on archery improvements instead of beast feats is a formidable killing machine with each character having a meat shield to provide cover and soak up damage. Spend the extra feat for being a human on multiclass warlord for a healing bump and that party has the damage to flatten anything quickly, built in cover/terrain block/and some extra healling just in case (although the ability to deal massive damage at range and second winds will probably make this "extra healing" not as necessary as you think). Not the way I would want to play the game but effective with just one role represented and viable in a game. The extra skill for being human combined with clever backgrounds and the wide range and number of skills rangers get allows the party to make up a lot of ground there and be capable of handling many different types of encounters.
Just so we are square I would strongly discourage any players from playing a group built like that in a game I was running.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

There are other wizards and warriors and such around to teach them (npcs and stuff.)

As for what makes them heres... Personally I'd rather the game didn't try to define that for me. My group and I can determine the how or why of it.

The PCs aren't special because of the powers they have- they're special in a storybook kind of way. They have "moxie" that other people don't have. It's probably what drives them to get up and do what they do in the first place.

At least in my opinion.

That's fine if that's the sort of game you like but I like for my characters to begin as just a plain guy/girl and work my way up.

Just slapping a full background on my character feels like a cheat in my opinion. I like to give my character a simple back story then let the events of the game write my character's story as we go along.

 

[Kelvor Ravenstar]

Your level 1 character is not very tough at all in 4e... I believe the level 0 rules do what they should do. Give the chance of a single adventure to advance to heroic...

I would not want D&D to have more than one or at most 2 of those levels...

If you look at older editions, it is level 2 where you started to be better than the average goblin You have all important class features (a bard gets access to spells) and your HP is high enough to not die to a random blow from a goblin.

The only thing that bothers me at level 1 in 4e is not the "power" of the classes, but the number of powers already available.

So IMHO you could easily fit some extra "levels" between 0 and 1:

1. only race powers (level 0)
2. only race and theme powers (optional level 0.5)
3. a multiclass feat from your class which usually end in getting one defining feature as an encounter/daily.
...

i think you may get the point...

These extra "levels" was pretty much the system I was working out that [MENTION=98255]Nemesis Destiny[/MENTION] mentioned upthread. I broke them down into five named instead of numbered "levels" in what I called the "Apprentice Tier".
It is designed to take you from only one choice up to the full options available for 4e characters at level one. Apprentice characters over the short half-tier gained their racial benefits, background benefit, 1st level theme benefits, a role benefit, then their full class minus their feats.

ChattyDM's rules with the Power Source At-Wills are great, I think they're going to replace my role benefits in Apprentice Tier when I run my next campaign. I quite like [MENTION=59057]UngeheuerLich[/MENTION] 's idea of getting part of the classe's abilities with the benefit of a multiclass feat, I may have to adopt that in my 0th level rules mashup

 

[Scribble]

That's fine if that's the sort of game you like but I like for my characters to begin as just a plain guy/girl and work my way up.

Just slapping a full background on my character feels like a cheat in my opinion. I like to give my character a simple back story then let the events of the game write my character's story as we go along.

No one is slapping a full background on your character, it's just a different idea of what is being portrayed.

 

[pamenard]

When WotC awarded me with this article (and adventure) which was a "to order" piece, I had many goals and constraints I wanted to mesh together. I'll write a blog post about it in the next few days.

Just know that I'm overjoyed to see so many people's mind tickled by the concepts, playing with them to make them fit their expectations.

With the rules, I expected some people to like them, others to hate them, most to ignore them (as they should) and, especially, a small crowd to hack the rules to pieces to make them fit their needs. I really like what I read so far here.

As for the adventure, I was aiming at creating the type of adventure I'd want to play with such rules. In fact I'm starting my next campaign with it.

Thanks for the thoughts, ideas and feedback.

(I should edit that Signature of mine)

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

It looks like a fun little adventure. The how the PCs got there is maybe the weakest part. I have a thought. How about instead of the PCs caretaker SENDING them to the temple, instead it is more of a 'stumbled upon the magic wardrobe' situation. They've been raised with the idea in mind that SOMEDAY they were going to become adventurers and perform the quest, but they've launched themselves off on their own a bit ahead of schedule by sheer pluck, or perhaps Drogto or some goblin somehow is behind it. I think simple is best, the PCs find the wardrobe, they go through, and stuff happens.

 

[Klaus]

The best part of the adventure is that it's NOT what you expect from a 0-level adventure. Rescuing a goddess in another plane? That's EPIC stuff! At zero level!

Of course, this means the characters will rescue the innkeeper's dog at 30th level.

 

[LostSoul]

I think the most interesting thing you did was to make a fast-paced reward system - getting those tokens after encounters, then allowing them to be used when needed is a pretty neat trick! I am impressed.