Advice: How to handle a party of mixed levels?
- Thread starter Eternalknight
- Start date
mkletch
First Post
Some of our DMs use the FR system (including me) and others use the DMG system. I've found that the FR system helps people catch up from losing levels various ways, or if they make magic items to help the whole party.
The DMG system discourages any attachment to characters: they die, lose a level coming back (we've banned True Res in some campaigns, or it is simply not available), and never catch up. It's better to make a new guy at the avg. party level.
-Fletch!
The DMG system discourages any attachment to characters: they die, lose a level coming back (we've banned True Res in some campaigns, or it is simply not available), and never catch up. It's better to make a new guy at the avg. party level.
-Fletch!
Will
First Post
I third (fourth, fifth, ... whatever) the FR suggestion.
The problem is that in current 3e XP progression means that it takes a _long_ time to make up a level difference. This is one reason I dislike loosing a level due to death (but that's another argument).
I was in a game where the GM decided that new players would start at 1/2 average party XP. So I was a few levels behind (6th in a party of 10th leveled).
It was awful. I kept getting my ass handed to me, and the party had to fight hard to keep me from getting creamed.
Furthermore, I finally figured out that it would be 10+ levels before I even closed within a level of the rest of the group... assuming I was able to attend every game.
An elastic scale, IMO, helps keep the party in the same field, and also, I think, accurately takes into account the horrible danger low level characters can face in tough circumstances.
Though you may want to add some DM fiat... if the high level wizard keeps Cloudkilling mooks, the low-level party members don't really deserve XP. But not always... even when high level characters can take care of a threat, one area effect spell or misstep can obliterate the low level guys.
The problem is that in current 3e XP progression means that it takes a _long_ time to make up a level difference. This is one reason I dislike loosing a level due to death (but that's another argument).
I was in a game where the GM decided that new players would start at 1/2 average party XP. So I was a few levels behind (6th in a party of 10th leveled).
It was awful. I kept getting my ass handed to me, and the party had to fight hard to keep me from getting creamed.
Furthermore, I finally figured out that it would be 10+ levels before I even closed within a level of the rest of the group... assuming I was able to attend every game.
An elastic scale, IMO, helps keep the party in the same field, and also, I think, accurately takes into account the horrible danger low level characters can face in tough circumstances.
Though you may want to add some DM fiat... if the high level wizard keeps Cloudkilling mooks, the low-level party members don't really deserve XP. But not always... even when high level characters can take care of a threat, one area effect spell or misstep can obliterate the low level guys.
One unusual solution is to give the lower-level characters extra Fate Points (or whatever you want to call them), allowing them to keep up with the big guns via "lucky" rolls.
This idea is central to the Buffy the Vampire Slayer game, where one player is assumed to play the Slayer, and the rest of the party members are lower-powered White Hats.
This idea is central to the Buffy the Vampire Slayer game, where one player is assumed to play the Slayer, and the rest of the party members are lower-powered White Hats.
Bendris Noulg
First Post
Ditto.Cedric said:
Creamsteak
Explorer
Well, besides all of the plentiful advice given so far, one thing that helps groups with spared levels is altering encounters a bit differently.
One idea that struck me when I read the first post was, "What if a group consisted of a fresh young 1st level with a lot of potential, and the rest of the group had varying degrees of experience?"
And this made me think back to The Hobbit and Lodoss War. In both of these stories, the main character was definitely not the strongest character in the group, but he was definitely important and served an equal part.
One way to 'help' the weaker characters is to leave opportunities for them to 'struggle' where the higher level characters would easily destroy an opponent. Depending on the actual role-play and thoughts of the characters and players, some encounters may seem absolutely trivial to the group. Here's my example situation:
Simple set-up, Goblins in mass attack a human village. They have vast numbers, many rogues and fighters in the mix, and other nasty trouble makers, but none higher than level 4. The highest level PC's are 8th level, and the lowest is a 2nd level fighter. As the group confronts the goblins in many different and varied battles, they work their way through multiple ranks and situations of battle, until only the shaman/chieftan/etc. is left. The 8th Level mage, who could easily destroy this challenge is, for some personal reason (or specifically to help aid the young fighter), refuses to fight it himself. Instead, he 'somewhat underhandedly' asks for the fighters sword for a second, then casts a stilled, silented, magic weapon or similar spell on the blade before returning it to the still healthy warrior and telling him to 'deal with the goblin'.
The fighter, hopefully, edges out the fight and unknowingly is aided by the mage, and we the sneaky DMs give the fighter the full 1200 experience just to him, working towards his catching up.
Of course, none of this is really directly applicable advice, but it's the thoughts that occured to me concerning the situation, inspired by recently re-watching the old Lodoss war boxed set.
One idea that struck me when I read the first post was, "What if a group consisted of a fresh young 1st level with a lot of potential, and the rest of the group had varying degrees of experience?"
And this made me think back to The Hobbit and Lodoss War. In both of these stories, the main character was definitely not the strongest character in the group, but he was definitely important and served an equal part.
One way to 'help' the weaker characters is to leave opportunities for them to 'struggle' where the higher level characters would easily destroy an opponent. Depending on the actual role-play and thoughts of the characters and players, some encounters may seem absolutely trivial to the group. Here's my example situation:
Simple set-up, Goblins in mass attack a human village. They have vast numbers, many rogues and fighters in the mix, and other nasty trouble makers, but none higher than level 4. The highest level PC's are 8th level, and the lowest is a 2nd level fighter. As the group confronts the goblins in many different and varied battles, they work their way through multiple ranks and situations of battle, until only the shaman/chieftan/etc. is left. The 8th Level mage, who could easily destroy this challenge is, for some personal reason (or specifically to help aid the young fighter), refuses to fight it himself. Instead, he 'somewhat underhandedly' asks for the fighters sword for a second, then casts a stilled, silented, magic weapon or similar spell on the blade before returning it to the still healthy warrior and telling him to 'deal with the goblin'.
The fighter, hopefully, edges out the fight and unknowingly is aided by the mage, and we the sneaky DMs give the fighter the full 1200 experience just to him, working towards his catching up.
Of course, none of this is really directly applicable advice, but it's the thoughts that occured to me concerning the situation, inspired by recently re-watching the old Lodoss war boxed set.
Victim
First Post
Parn didn't serve an equal role, though, at least not until the end. He'd run screaming at someone, then get disarmed. Frodo didn't do a whole lot either. Were those characters as important as other characters due to outside considerations? Probably. But they didn't play an equal role.
And I can't imagine your situation occuring in actual play, either. Especially the still, silent magic weapon. That's least believable part.
And I can't imagine your situation occuring in actual play, either. Especially the still, silent magic weapon. That's least believable part.
Darkness
Hand and Eye of Piratecat [Moderator]
Also, and especially at the higher ELs, you sometimes might want to compose the ELs not of a few tough monsters, but rather of 1-2 tough monsters and lots of weaker creatures. (The reason, of course, being that this will allow the lower-level characters to be more useful and not as endangered.)rijeagle said:
Similar Threads
