Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
L&L 1/13/14: Low-Level Characters in D&D Next
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Rhenny" data-source="post: 6248848" data-attributes="member: 18333"><p>I think it is absolutely essential that D&D Next make the first few levels weaker and easier to manage. There are more reasons for that even for veteran players. (I've been DMing and playing the game quite a lot over the past year).</p><p></p><p>1) I'm sure that WoTC has received data that shows how a good number of folk (even veterans) want a chance to play simpler more frail PCs, at least to start). I think from what I've read (sorry I can't sight source) is that most D&D campaigns fizzle before the get to really high levels anyway and most of that occurs because the game gets too complicated. In my experiences over 30 years, I've always felt an urge to end a campaign before level 14 or so. It may be that my preference is to run simpler more frail PCs.</p><p></p><p>2) The game becomes more dynamic if low level play feels different from mid-level play, from higher level play, from super-high level play. This gives people the opportunity to develop the zero to hero, which again some people like.</p><p></p><p>3) It is far easier to add than to take away. For people who don't want the frail simple PC, the party can begin at higher levels, or the DM can even give more choices to the 1st level players. In the WotC threads someone came up with a great idea to let a first level PC give up 2 attribute points (either +1 in 2 abilities, or +2 in one) to take a feat right off the bat at 1st level. For veteran players that might be a cool choice (personally, I like variety in my PCs rather than pure power...so for players like me, that would work). Having to play 0 level or negative levels, or have handicaps placed on more powerful 1st level PCs marginalizes the choice to play weaker, simpler PCs.</p><p></p><p>4) In my experience with D&D Next, the simpler PCs at lower level have actually forced my players (some veterans and some newbies) to think more like their PCs and roleplay more in line with their character concepts (background, class and race fluff and crunch). When players don't have to sort out too many powers or figure out how to use too many abilities, they relax and they do things that the think their PC should do, not just what it says they can do on the character sheet. Once the campaign begins with interaction and roleplaying, for me, it is much more thrilling.</p><p></p><p>These ideas, plus others that people have mentioned makes it nearly impossible for WoTC to do anything else but make the first few levels simpler and more frail. I believe they are on the right track.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Rhenny, post: 6248848, member: 18333"] I think it is absolutely essential that D&D Next make the first few levels weaker and easier to manage. There are more reasons for that even for veteran players. (I've been DMing and playing the game quite a lot over the past year). 1) I'm sure that WoTC has received data that shows how a good number of folk (even veterans) want a chance to play simpler more frail PCs, at least to start). I think from what I've read (sorry I can't sight source) is that most D&D campaigns fizzle before the get to really high levels anyway and most of that occurs because the game gets too complicated. In my experiences over 30 years, I've always felt an urge to end a campaign before level 14 or so. It may be that my preference is to run simpler more frail PCs. 2) The game becomes more dynamic if low level play feels different from mid-level play, from higher level play, from super-high level play. This gives people the opportunity to develop the zero to hero, which again some people like. 3) It is far easier to add than to take away. For people who don't want the frail simple PC, the party can begin at higher levels, or the DM can even give more choices to the 1st level players. In the WotC threads someone came up with a great idea to let a first level PC give up 2 attribute points (either +1 in 2 abilities, or +2 in one) to take a feat right off the bat at 1st level. For veteran players that might be a cool choice (personally, I like variety in my PCs rather than pure power...so for players like me, that would work). Having to play 0 level or negative levels, or have handicaps placed on more powerful 1st level PCs marginalizes the choice to play weaker, simpler PCs. 4) In my experience with D&D Next, the simpler PCs at lower level have actually forced my players (some veterans and some newbies) to think more like their PCs and roleplay more in line with their character concepts (background, class and race fluff and crunch). When players don't have to sort out too many powers or figure out how to use too many abilities, they relax and they do things that the think their PC should do, not just what it says they can do on the character sheet. Once the campaign begins with interaction and roleplaying, for me, it is much more thrilling. These ideas, plus others that people have mentioned makes it nearly impossible for WoTC to do anything else but make the first few levels simpler and more frail. I believe they are on the right track. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
L&L 1/13/14: Low-Level Characters in D&D Next
Top