Character Level Disparity in a group

[pdzoch]

I am curious about what a game master allows (or requires if the case may be) level disparity between characters of the adventure group. Do you expect or require all characters to be the same level? Or do your players fall behind because they miss a game or tow, so they are a level behind the rest of the group? Or do you allow players to join high adventure groups with characters that are far different from the other characters? At what point is the level disparity to dangerous, or too one sided? Should a 2nd level character play in a group of 5-7 level characters? If that is acceptable, can a 7th level character play in a group of 2-4 level characters? When does the level disparity break the game? Or just break the group?

 

[Lanefan]

Voted "2-3 levels" but it's both situationally dependent and system dependent.

In D&D, editions 0 1 2 and 5 have done mixed-level play much better than 3 or 4 did. In 3e a disparity of more than 1 level was a big deal; I gather much the same is true in 4e.

But in the other editons where mixed-level play is more practical it's a situational thing, and develops over time. The party all start at 1st level, but by their 15th adventure they might well range from 3rd-6th. Level loss is a thing in my game, as is occasional random level gain. Characters die, retire, return, wander off, so equal-level parties soon become very rare.

And party level itself makes a difference. A 5-level variance from 1st-5th is a much bigger deal than the same variance at 6th-10th (which my current party is at).

I guess another way of looking at it, maybe grist for another poll, is how far adrift of the party average is it acceptable for a character to be; and here - ignoring henches and hirelings - my answer would probably be '2'. So, your example of a 7th coming into a party of 2nd-4ths wouldn't fly.

Lanefan

 

[JonnyP71]

All new PCs start at 1st level. We have occasional side quest sessions where all the players get a chance to get some experience for 'spare' characters.

 

[Darkness]

Depends on system and also on campaign intentions.

 

[KahlessNestor]

AL allows tier levels (1-4, 5-10, etc), but also adjusts the adventure difficulty.

Sent from my SM-G900P using EN World mobile app

 

[The Crimson Binome]

I don't understand how it's possible to bring a higher-level character into a group. If the main party is level 10, and someone shows up who is level 14, then where did those levels come from? Is it just a world where high-level characters are relatively commonplace, and the level 10 PCs are chumps who don't really matter?

 

[aramis erak]

In a home game, I generally allow replacement PC's to be ((lowest level in party) –1). New players come in at first and have to survive.

In my DDAL game, I've asked players who not regulars not to bring characters above the highest party member who is ongoing long-term. So far, they've all agreed to that. Given that my FLGS has two tables running on the night I run, the one who was unhappy about that played at the other table.

Most games I run don't have levels, so it's a non-issue.

 

[Lwaxy]

Most games, it's all the same level. However, in some games where players play more than one char, there is a much wider gap. 10 level differences aren't so uncommon, and groups of mixed levels adventure together.

 

[ccs]

Depends upon how I'm doing advancement atm.

If it's by XP awarded? Then about a 2-3 lv variance can occur. I only award xp to those characters whose players attended the session. Additionally bonus xp can be earned and on occasion you can lose xp.... And depending upon edition you could suffer actual lv drain from undead etc.

If I'm running it by milestone (my two current campaigns) then you'll all be the same lv - unless there's some truly outstanding reason. (Ex, in one game I play in our paladin player got in a snit about something & essentially dropped out for several months. His character was actively NOT participating in the adventures, so the DM stopped his advancement. No milestones, no xp....)

In one game I ran I based your advancement on # of session needed to attend per lv. You had to attend as many sessions as you had lvs. So if you were 5th lv, you needed to come to 5 sessions to get to 6th. It worked out that there was only a 1 lv swing for awhile. Then whoever was ahead would miss a game or two & those behind would catch up. Wash/rinse/repeat over about 8 lvs.....

 

[Dualazi]

In my current campaign there's no real requirement either way. New characters always start at one of the prior benchmarks (5 in this case), and players are awarded experience for games they attend. So far the level spread hasn't been too extreme but I wouldn't be surprised if the range increases as the campaign progresses.