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="pemerton" data-source="post: 5935108" data-attributes="member: 42582">As someone else said, I don't see how one is harder then the other.But I think it's a serious design flaw from the point of teachability to have the game start at a 1st level that will provide an unsatisfying play experience. Because every new player is going to begin at level 1. It's a natural and default starting point - if you weren't meant to start there, why would it be labelled "first"?This is a red herring in my view. 4e PCs are highly vulnerable in fights at low levels - it's just that it will take multiple blows to drop them from full to zero hp. (Thereby reducing the Russian roulette factor.)Correct. When I sit down to play chess I don't feel fulfilled unless all the pieces are there (if I want to forfeit a piece, that's my choice).When I sit down to play 500 or bridge, I don't feel fulfilled unless I'm dealt a complete hand.Of course, whether I play chess well or poorly is independent of starting with all the pieces. And I've played cards with people who would barely know what to bid even if they picked up a single-suit, Ace-high hand.But, as I said upthread and as others are saying, it's about having the necessary components of a PC to actually play the game as advertised!This is a big issue in B/X and AD&D. The Basic rulebook talks about Hercules and Merlin, but it is impossible to play such a character using those rules. Hercules cannot be one-shotted by a kobold, and Merlin is not a snivelling weakling who can cast a single (randomly determined) spell.The foreword to the game even has a narrative about rescuing a princess by killing a fire-breathing dragon tyrant with a single swing of an enchanted sword - a feat that it is impossible to replicate using the game mechanics, given max damage would be 16 (10 for 2h sword +3 for enchantment +3 for STR) and no fire breathing dragon tyrant in the game is going to have so few hit points (I think red dragons in basic have 9 HD).I'm happy to be frank about this: in my experience, 1st level play in B/X D&D and 1st ed AD&D sucks. The game expects you to fight (there are fights within the first couple of rooms in the examples of play in both sets of rulebooks, and most of the rules are about fighting) but you don't have enough hit points to confidently have your PC enter a fight. A wizard has almost no magic. And a thief's success chance for special abilities is crap (AD&D is a bit better here with DEX and racial bonuses). In AD&D (but not B/X) a 1st level fighter also has the worst saves of any character.Just making it to second level doubles your hit points. Making it to 3rd level gets fighter (in AD&D, at least) onto a better attack chart and a better saving throw chart.The one time I really enjoyed a 1st level AD&D PC was in 2nd ed. But that PC was an uber-cleric built using the broken rules from Skills and Powers. So although I was technically 1st level, in functional terms I was probably closer to 3rd in all respects but hp (eg I had access to Evocation spells while using a cleric's spell table, including bonus spells for WIS; and the +/-2 to stat rules ensured that my relevant WIS score was 18).I would strongly encourage the designers to avoid building a game which will repicate classic 1st level D&d play as the default.Nicely put.</blockquote>

Verification