Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jeff Carlsen" data-source="post: 5792520" data-attributes="member: 61749">I think a lot of people (though not everybody) are missing the point, which isn't that the original poster doesn't like starting at level 1, but that he doesn't like the lack of granularity for characters in the world who are less powerful that trained PC's.A level 1 character is a professional. They've finished whatever basic training and journeyman periods they need to go through. All aspects of level 1 should reflect that.Level 0 would be for the apprentice and journeyman level. All classes, both PC and NPC, should have Level 0 abilities. Thus, when multi-classing, you have to go through Level 0 in a class. Each class's Level 0 would also take a particular amount of time to complete. A fighter can pick up those skills in a few months. A wizard might have to take a few years to learn the basics. At character gen, I think it would be fine for a character to have completed level 0 for up to two classes, but probably with some penalty.The general assumption of the setting should be that children grow up, then sometime in their youth they become apprentices. Some take PC classes, some take NPC classes. All Level 1 characters are thus newly graduated professionals. Trained, but inexperienced, and thus have 0 XP.Everyone in a fantasy setting has to learn to defend themselves, at least a little. So a commoner, by Level 10, will have more Hit Points than a Level 1 fighter, probably because he's 47 years old and has been in a few scuffles, monster attacks, and town riots. If he hadn't, he wouldn't have ten levels in any class.</blockquote>

Verification