D&D 4E 1st level 4E characters are already Heroes

[Eric Tolle]

Not everybody plays strong and burly barbarians. Lots of people play wizards and rogues.

Yes well, wizards and rogues don't count in these discussions. Characters who can be killed by a single crossbow shot don't exist, it's all fighters and barbarians.

 

[Sun Knight]

Again, how often does that happen? I have played numerous rogues and wizards in my time as a gamer and well, I have never had a 1st level character killed with one hit. Dropped and dying, but later stabilized yes, but not outright killed.

 

[Wormwood]

Again, how often does that happen? I have played numerous rogues and wizards in my time as a gamer and well, I have never had a 1st level character killed with one hit. Dropped and dying, but later stabilized yes, but not outright killed.

Yes, it has happened enough in the past 27 years that I no longer start D&D games at anything lower than third level. And even then we use max hit points per level.

I know, I know. We're doing it wrong.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Yes, it has happened enough in the past 27 years that I no longer start D&D games at anything lower than third level. And even then we use max hit points per level.

You've described just about every D&D campaign I've ever run.

 

[Grog]

Yes well, wizards and rogues don't count in these discussions. Characters who can be killed by a single crossbow shot don't exist, it's all fighters and barbarians.

Heh.

I do get tired of the people claiming that first level characters are fine only talking about fighters and barbarians. Yes, I agree, those classes play just fine at first level. But there are lots of other classes in the game, and several of them have major problems at first level. I'd much rather see the next edition of D&D try to address those problems, rather than continue with the "Suck it up and play a crappy character until you gain a couple of levels and can start having fun" mindset.

 

[Nebulous]

So does that mean we may get more than 4x the normal amount of skill points at first level?

If the skills go like SW Saga, it will work completely different.

 

[mmadsen]

New people aren't going to read about how 1st level is only for the old skool players and they should start at 3rd if they actually want to have fun.

If they read that, they're going to put the book down and walk away. And I don't blame them. That doesn't make the least bit of sense. Why suffer for a while before you're allowed to have fun?

Huh?

If the book says that characters start at third level, and the sample starting characters are all third level, why would a new player think otherwise?

 

[Naszir]

Yes, it has happened enough in the past 27 years that I no longer start D&D games at anything lower than third level. And even then we use max hit points per level.

I know, I know. We're doing it wrong.

What about providing monsters that are not as dangerous to characters at 1st level? Kobolds without crossbows? What about giving characters xp for figuring out how to avoid combat or xp for discovering something useful or xp for something else not necessarily combat related? If you don't like playing this way then starting characters at 3rd level is a good way to go.

I do understand the trepidation that 1st level characters create. If you have people who are new to the game and they have a fighter, their first inclination is to wade into battle like a proper fighter. Maybe they don't tactically wait for the ranger to weed out a few baddies with his bow. Then a few lucky hits by a kobold or two carrying short swords could take the fighter down.

As a DM you want to create situations that the characters can survive if they are smart. At 1st level you sometimes have to be a little more creative and give the characters an advantage over the baddies they are facing and making it so that the characters would really have to make a stupid move to fail. As they go up in level you can start reducing this advantage if you want.

 

[Wormwood]

As a DM you want to create situations that the characters can survive if they are smart. At 1st level you sometimes have to be a little more creative and give the characters an advantage over the baddies they are facing and making it so that the characters would really have to make a stupid move to fail.

That's what I do. My creative approach to fragile, incompetent 1st-level characters is to make them 3rd-level characters.

Works like a charm.

 

[Naszir]

That's what I do. My creative approach to fragile, incompetent 1st-level characters is to make them 3rd-level characters.

Works like a charm.

Correct, either way works. If that works best for you and your players than that is as good as any other way.