Everyone starts at 1st level

[haakon1]

It's not for everyone, but deveoping a character from scratch is often more fun than starting at 6th level.

Especially for someone's very first PC, earning your stripes and paying your dues is a lot more fun (IMHO) than having everything handed to you. Also, you really learn what everything means and how to use it, when you slowly and laboriously accumulated each power and piece of equipment. A neophyte with a 6th level cleric isn't going to be very good at playing at a 6th level cleric . . . a neophyte with a 1st level cleric will figure it out fast.

Which reminds me, in the Temple of Elemental Evil computer game, 1st level or NPC were the only ways to get characters into the party. I started 1st level characters into 5th level or so parties in that -- including a 1st level cleric who basically just summoned or healed for a while.

 

[haakon1]

That's my point; when you go exploring, you want to be Kirk, Spock, Bones, or Sulu, not Ensign Rogers.

Ah, Sulu is a good example of mixed leveling. Spock and Kirk were clearly higher level that Sulu or Chekov (Chekov is always the first to fail a saving throw, Kirk or Spock the last), but it worked just fine for everyone . . . the red shirts were not PC's.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

In 4E, I'd remove the 1/2 level bonus as a start. (Subtract this also from monster and PC attacks. You might want to go a step further and also remove item enhancement bonuses. In that case, drop monsters a further point per 5 levels. Or just give the PC higher level items. The other PCs could create them for him.

Of course, now the XP charts don't work as well as they used to - lower level monsters are stronger than they should be, and higher level monsters are weaker than they should be. Additional tweaking would be required.

 

[Christian]

Starting everyone at 1st level certainly did work better in the older edition. But why was it easier in 1st than in 2nd (in AD&D for a while and 2nd for nearly a decade). Baseline 1e and 2e are almost identical mechanically.

Advancement rules changed between editions. The 1 xp per gp rule from AD&D 1E was fantastic for helping characters quickly shoot up in level when adventuring with higher-level groups.

 

[Badwe]

for 4e: can we assume they cover the new guy in appropriate level gear? Level 1 rolls with level 10s, they give him level 10+gear, meaning he could potentially gain 2 or 3 points of AC, non-Ac defenses, and to-hit. that would narrow the difference down to +5 from half level, or about a -25% chance to hit anything appropriately leveled, and anything appropriately leveled is 25% more likely to hit. this ignores stat bumps too, so possibly 30% both ways from a +6.

 

[CubeKnight]

Add one vote to "Remove half-level and +X magic items, and 4E should do the trick".

 

[AllisterH]

The first question should be

How much does gear factor into level awesomeness?

If you outfit the 1st level character in gear that is about the same quality as the higher level party, how much behind will he be?

Across all editions of D&D, this has been true...

 

[JRRNeiklot]

Also, since magic items weren't easily bought and sold, it was pretty easy to outfit a level one in decent gear in 1e. In 3e, that +2 sword was always sold to help buy a ring of protection +3, but in 1e, those were used to outfit new party members, hirelings, etc. And one encounter might net the new guy 1,000 gold which goes a long way toward leveling him. Hell, an npc might pay the group in advance and wham, he's level 2 without drawing a weapon.

Jinx! You owe me a coke!

 

[AllisterH]

Also, since magic items weren't easily bought and sold, it was pretty easy to outfit a level one in decent gear in 1e. In 3e, that +2 sword was always sold to help buy a ring of protection +3, but in 1e, those were used to outfit new party members, hirelings, etc. And one encounter might net the new guy 1,000 gold which goes a long way toward leveling him. Hell, an npc might pay the group in advance and wham, he's level 2 without drawing a weapon.

Jinx! You owe me a coke!

1e this wouldn't be true since you need gp to get xp and treasure could be sold (just couldn't be bought)

2nd edition, this is where you would find PCs that had wheelbarrows filled with excess magic items they no longer needed but couldn't unload.

re: 1st level PC in higher level party

After you determine how much gear brings to the table, you then need to determine how lethal the game is...a hill giant in 4e is doing 2d10+7 (crit max of 27 pts of damage) so not enough to obliterate a 1st level melee centric PC. Similarly, a hill giant in 2e is doing 2d6 + 7 which while lethal toa 1st level PC shouldn't kill them outright

Whereas in 3e, that poor PC is going to be a fine mist when the giant hits

 

[Thanee]

No, I'm saying that it basically does work.

Yeah, I know what you are saying... The point is, the way you are playing certainly does support that kind of level gap (as Nifft said, more player-focused game instead of character-focused).

You can easily have a game, that has a lot of roleplaying (level is unimportant) and player puzzles (level is unimportant).

The average game does not work that way, though.


Anyways, I still don't see the point. What's the advantage of starting at 1st level, when the rest of the party is like 12th?

Bye
Thanee