Characters 1st level but the background is 5th

[Zaruthustran]

I've been getting some character backgrouds for a modern game I'm going to be running and while all the characters are first level, some of the people have a background so rich with flavor that it's pretty impossible to believe that the character is first. Basically, there are a few things in the background that a first level character just could not be able to do.

So, is this is problem others have and is this really a problem?

Two words: level drain.

Just make your "first level" PC really a 5th, 10th, or 42nd level PC that has had a bad run in with level draining effects.

Doing so will explain a deep background, and also explain all your in-game knowledge of the Monster Manual, spell effects, etc.

My first 3E PC used this technique. He was a dwarf whose stronghold was overrun by vampires. He got busted down to first level, and ever after, he was on a mission to slay undead and reclaim lost dwarf strongholds.

In d20 Modern you might have trouble with level drain. But I'd bet long imprisonment, or amnesia, or some kind of drug could have the same effect.

-z

 

[Arnwyn]

My players have a good grasp on what 1st level means, so I haven't run into any problems.

However, one player always seems to make his character's *parents* some sort of uber-powerful-d00ds (I'm exaggerating, but you get the picture) with funky prestige classes and what-not. He does this a lot - and some of you may see where he's going with this. However, I don't complain because at least he's putting some effort into his background and is allowing for his character to be easily integrated into a campaign.

 

[Henry]

I rarely have that problem. More often, I must pull a background out with my bare hands, jsut as one must push toothpaste back into the tube.

I have one or two players that are background fanatics, and these are easy to work with. With others, I must give story awards, usually on the order of so much XP per paragraph, with a maximum of * experience points.

How about the opposite - a DM who uses absolutely NONE of the background you give him? One DM enjoys using the Central Casting system in our games, but unfortunately, the character comes out the other side looking like a Soap Opera character. One campaign, I refused the option of going through central casting, but wrote up a believeable background with about 3 paragraphs of plot hooks. The DM used none of them, but quite liberally used the plot hooks of those players who had taken the "Central Casting Plunge."

I love the idea of Central Casting, but it generally takes a pre-existing character concept and mangles it beyond all recognition. However, it does give fascinating backgrounds when you have absolutely nothing in mind for a new character.

 

[Wicht]

But suppose you want to begin play as a retired mercenary. Not necessarily an elite badass, just an old man who has been around the block a couple of times and seen a few battles. You can twink stats all you want, and fiddle with the skill points, and you still don't have a character who is really any different mechanicswise from the character played by the player who is supposed to be a green 16 year old who never had killed anything more dangerous than a rabbit and has dreams of being a knight.

Why not just start the retired mercenary off at 5th level and have done with it? I don't see the problem with 3e here. There is a perfectly valid way to start off with a more powerful or knowledgable character.

 

[Mort]

You can twink stats all you want, and fiddle with the skill points, and you still don't have a character who is really any different mechanicswise from the character played by the player who is supposed to be a green 16 year old who never had killed anything more dangerous than a rabbit and has dreams of being a knight.

You say that like it’s a bad thing.I prefer that the two are the same mechanically. Their thought processes actions and outlook on life are what should define them, in other words the role playing. Heck they can both have the same feats say: combat reflexes and weapon focus – but one developed them through training without any actual experience and the other developed them through life or death situations. If the veteren is to "experienced" and or good to portray through role-playing, well it's kind of unfair to the other players isn't it (and if their ok with it, they'd be ok with him starting at a higher level anyway).

That said, I will agree that 3e is more limiting than many systems out there insofar as how much you can do with a first level character. Almost all those systems gain that “flexibility” from an advantage/disadvantage mechanic of some kind –which I hate with a passion. I never want to see another illiterate/lame/one-eared/amnesiac who (because of accumulated points) can hit a fly at 100 yards and could never be hit in return.

 

[Celebrim]

arnwyn: It is for that reason that I never allow a player to put attributes, classes, levels or other gaming content in backgrounds. If you want to say that your Dad is heroicly strong fine, it may turn out that this was your childlike admiration and he is only unusually strong especially given his age. If you want to say your parents were mages, fine, but I get to decide on the level etc. But in general, I'm pretty free with allowing you to have connections to the society, even important connections, just so long as you understand that those connections are devices which I will use largely for my benifit, not unrecorded and unpaid for advantages to be used to circumvent obstacles. Yes, your mentor may be there to provide aid, but don't expect your 'dad' to 'give you the keys to the car' just because 'you've got a big date tonight' (as it were).

 

[Darkness]

I think this is a problem across the board with role playing games, not just D&D. All games have characters start off at the traditional low level be it an actual low level of just low on points.

Actually... No, "all" games certainly don't.

Some games default to beginning at 1st level but others default to giving beginning characters more power.

Anyway, in just about every game (including D&D) it's highly variable, depending on what the GM (and/or the players, for that matter) wants or needs; 1st level is only a minimum that you can raise as much as is necessary.

I've started D&D games at 1st level and I've started D&D games at 12th level - so I don't quite see where the problem you describe lies, exactly.

As for games where the default assumption is to start above "1st level" (or the point-equivalent thereof):

A GURPS character usually gets 100 or, sometimes, 200 points at character creation (though it vary wildly depending on the campaign in question, from 25 points to 500 and beyond); the man on the street has around 25.
So a beginning 100-point GURPS character definitely stands out from the crowd.

Characters in, say, Exalted ( ) or Shadowrun don't start as "1st-level" characters, either, unless you downgrade the default stats. And the same is true for almost any superhero RPG you care to name.
Of course, compared to the man on the street, a 1st-level D&D character with a PC class is quite more "heroic" than the man on the street as well. Admittedly probably not as much so as a typical starting character in any of the games I just listed but still...

And the problem is more with players then with the system I think, they just write up something to herioc for the type of character they are playing.

I'm just confused why anyone would thing people move away from the system becasue of this?

Why are you confused?
Anyway, this has nothing to do with the system; it's a GM decision, pure and simple.

 

[Crothian]

Some games default to beginning at 1st level but others default to giving beginning characters more power.

But are still that games equivalant of 1st level. In the point system games one still starts with X points and grows from there. But what other systems do and don't do is really not important here.

Of course, compared to the man on the street, a 1st-level D&D character with a PC class is quite more "heroic" than the man on the street as well. Admittedly probably not as much so as a typical starting character in any of the games I just listed but still... Why are you confused?
Anyway, this has nothing to do with the system; it's a GM decision, pure and simple.

I just don't think people leave D&D because of backgrounds. As you said it's a DM thing, not a game thing. The DM can restict backgrounds or allow them as he sees fit in any system. It just seems silly to think this problem is unique D&D or level based games, when it is solely up to the DM.

 

[Darkness]

But are still that games equivalant of 1st level.

Why?

I just don't think people leave D&D because of backgrounds. As you said it's a DM thing, not a game thing. The DM can restict backgrounds or allow them as he sees fit in any system. It just seems silly to think this problem is unique D&D or level based games, when it is solely up to the DM.

Again, I don't see this "problem" that you are talking about.

 

[Celebrim]

This is a somewhat serious digression, but I have some problems with the GURPS assumption that the average man on the street is a 25 point character. I've worked in a wide variaty of places and met a wide varaity of people from every walk of life, and I have to think after meeting people and discovering that the average 'man on the street' isn't nearly as shallow as certain social classes like to think that the real average person translates into roughly a 50 point character, and 60-80 point characters are not at all unusual for educated people. So the difference between being a 100 point GURPS character and a realistic average modern person may not be as great as is assumed by the game. (BTW, last I tried, it took 68 points to stat myself out, so its not like I'm seriously overestimating peoples abilities to inflate my own. I'm not even a good PC.) Even the assumption that 150-175 points is necessary for realisitic leading figures is probably off and made solely to make 100 pt. PC's feel more heroic rather than on an honest appraisal of the abilities, talents, and resources of famous people or leading members of a given profession.