D&D 5E (2014) Do You Start At Level 1?

Do You Start At Level 1?

  • Yes, always.

    Votes: 15 26.3%
  • Usually

    Votes: 22 38.6%
  • Sometimes

    Votes: 10 17.5%
  • Rarely

    Votes: 7 12.3%
  • Never

    Votes: 3 5.3%

We always start at level 1, but it doesn't take long to level up for the first few. First sessions are more about learning about the campaign, deciding direction, establishing personalities.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Usually level 1 just to give the players a session or two to figure out their characters, but also because sometimes depending on the size of the group I will start the PCs in smaller groups in different sessions to give them more time to have personal playtime at the start, before them all coming together finally as an entire group at like level 2 or 3.
 

I mean level 1 is fine if your in to kicking of a campaign with powerful charachters......

1772722893933.jpeg
 


I think that is overstating it. The PHB says "typically adventurers start at level 1" but does acknowledge that the GM may start the campaign higher. What makes you think it "does not recommend" starting at 1st level?
There's some ambiguity in the MGibster's statement and yours that may be tripping you up. Not making a statement that explicitly recommends starting at level 1 isn't the same as recommending NOT starting with level 1, in general.

But it does also say, in the segment on starting at higher level, "It is particularly recommended to start at level 3 if your group is composed of seasoned D&D players."

I'd say, between those two statements, MGibster saying that it doesn't recommend starting at level 1 is correct.
 

There's some ambiguity in the MGibster's statement and yours that may be tripping you up. Not making a statement that explicitly recommends starting at level 1 isn't the same as recommending NOT starting with level 1, in general.

But it does also say, in the segment on starting at higher level, "It is particularly recommended to start at level 3 if your group is composed of seasoned D&D players."

I'd say, between those two statements, MGibster saying that it doesn't recommend starting at level 1 is correct.
That is kind of the long way around, isn't it? "We recommend starting at 3rd level for seasoned players" is not really the same thing as "We DO NOT recommend starting at level 1 for seasoned players."

But, yes, it is semantics and interpretation.
 

Depends highly on the nature of the campaign.

If its intended to be a more standard classic campaign then definitely level 1, for an important reason that was brought up on this thread but I almost never see.

I want the experience of having lower level monsters that are supposed to be a real challenge actually be so.

We fought a werewolf (actually two in immediate succession) at level 1, and since 3 of 5 PCs had cantrips (not an uncommon 5e thing) it wasn't all that hard. If the game had started at 3rd level you couldn't have the "discover the werewolf" adventure without making it a whole pack, or artificially inflating its stats from the MM.

Lots of other iconic monsters have the same issue. Ogres, classic undead, etc. I...just don't understand why the lack of ability to face the most iconic monsters in the normally expected way wouldn't bother most people.
 

I think that is overstating it. The PHB says "typically adventurers start at level 1" but does acknowledge that the GM may start the campaign higher. What makes you think it "does not recommend" starting at 1st level?
I’ll have to wait until I get home, but I thought the 2024 PHB recommended 3 as the starting level.
 

I’ll have to wait until I get home, but I thought the 2024 PHB recommended 3 as the starting level.
Page 43 (as pointed out by @billd91 ) says "It is particularly recommended starting at level 3 for seasoned players."

I find this interesting. If they know that level 1 and 2 are training wheels, why are they in the PHB and not just part of the starter set? What is the point of having 2 useless levels?
 

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Remove ads

Top