D&D 5E Let's discuss the Apprentice Tier.

[Warbringer]

Tiers-as-treasure strikes again!

Sorry, which means?

 

[I'm A Banana]

Sorry, which means?

Briefly, the idea that tiers can come as a switch the DM flips at certain points in the game that the group wants, rather than something hard-coded into levelling.

At length, this.

 

[Falling Icicle]

I think the apprentice tier should be part of a module. They say this is to help beginners, but that is something that has a one-time value per person, ever. Everyone else is just going to skip it and go right to level 3. Something that is avoided by the vast majority of players should, by definition, be a module. Besides, I find the notion that new players are too dumb to understand the very basic characters we have right now in Next to be extremely insulting to new players. The only two classes that have a modicum of complexity at 1st level right now are the Cleric and Rogue, and even then, I find it difficult to imagine how they could be overwhelming to anyone, IMO. If those classes are indeed too front-loaded, then they should just fix those two classes.

As for the argument that some people want "fantasy Vietnam" style super fragile low level characters, this isn't going to please them either, since the apprentice levels are designed to only last for one, maybe two play sessions. Besides, this is directly contradictory to the idea that apprentice levels are supposed to be designed for newer players. Having super fragile characters that can easily die is anything but friendly for new players! Further, if the apprentice tier is only supposed to last for one or two sessions, how can they say this is to help new characters learn and ease into their characters? They're just going to be leveling up almost immediately and have pretty much no time at all to get comfortable with the stuff they already had.

Finally, people say this will make multiclassing easier, because you won't get so much stuff from level 1 dipping. This is the only argument in favor of this apprentice tier idea that I think has any real merit. But still, they could accomplish the same goal in other ways, like giving multiclass characters different stuff at level 1 than single class characters get.

 

[hbarsquared]

I think the apprentice tier should be part of a module. They say this is to help beginners, but that is something that has a one-time value per person, ever. Everyone else is just going to skip it and go right to level 3. Something that is avoided by the vast majority of players should, by definition, be a module. Besides, I find the notion that new players are too dumb to understand the very basic characters we have right now in Next to be extremely insulting to new players. The only two classes that have a modicum of complexity at 1st level right now are the Cleric and Rogue, and even then, I find it difficult to imagine how they could be overwhelming to anyone, IMO. If those classes are indeed too front-loaded, then they should just fix those two classes.

Disagree, on all counts. I do not see it being a one-time value. My group and I would not only get enjoyment in playing through these "apprentice levels" for session or two the first time we unbox 5e, but I can easily visualize us, and plenty of other experienced groups, having fun playing through those levels, as well. Many on these forums have said something to this effect, too. Everyone will not skip to level 3, and I definitely don't see "the vast majority of players" doing this.

It is also not about dumb players. It's one: about bringing new players in, and two: about gradually introducing concepts in a more concrete way. Think about it: two sessions! This is probably the average time any new player, including smart ones, truly gets a hold and understanding on their character's abilities. Now it's just more codified into the level structure.

I also believe that gradually introducing abilities has the potential to lead to more roleplaying, instead of players constantly looking at their character sheets for that long list of abilities to choose to decide on the "best" way to react to a situation.

As for the argument that some people want "fantasy Vietnam" style super fragile low level characters, this isn't going to please them either, since the apprentice levels are designed to only last for one, maybe two play sessions. Besides, this is directly contradictory to the idea that apprentice levels are supposed to be designed for newer players. Having super fragile characters that can easily die is anything but friendly for new players! Further, if the apprentice tier is only supposed to last for one or two sessions, how can they say this is to help new characters learn and ease into their characters? They're just going to be leveling up almost immediately and have pretty much no time at all to get comfortable with the stuff they already had.

This is also not about "Vietnam style" characters, or "super-fragile" characters. It's about understandably fragile 1st-level characters. It's about that sense of danger, a real sense of failure, and overcoming those odds. It's about that knuckle-biting that we all felt when playing our first characters, precisely because they were so comparatively weak. That fear, that adrenaline, is just as important--if not more important--to getting new players hooked as game mechanics.

Finally, people say this will make multiclassing easier, because you won't get so much stuff from level 1 dipping. This is the only argument in favor of this apprentice tier idea that I think has any real merit. But still, they could accomplish the same goal in other ways, like giving multiclass characters different stuff at level 1 than single class characters get.

And yes, I agree with this (the first part). It works for multiclassing, it enables more playstyles, it reinforces 1st-level fragility, and it makes for a smooth, understandable, and intuitive system.

 

[Kobold Stew]

Isn't the problem simply that by calling it Apprentice, some people will want to skip them? Simply have levels 1-20. If the first few levels pass quickly, and by level 3 you are able to reliably cast a level-1 spell and some cantrips, then fine. People will buy that game, or they won't.

The label serves only as an obstacle and a point of dissention.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I think the apprentice tier should be part of a module. They say this is to help beginners, but that is something that has a one-time value per person, ever. Everyone else is just going to skip it and go right to level 3. Something that is avoided by the vast majority of players should, by definition, be a module.

Put yourself in the mind of a kid who knows absolutely jack nothing about D&D, but whose parents bought him The D&D Game for his birthday because they found the kid reading Harry Potter and heard it talked about on a website they frequent.

Now imagine that kid reading the rules and being a little paralyzed by all the new information they're absorbing, seeing all those first level abilities, not really grokking them on first read, putting the book away, and having it gather dust because the game just seems way too complicated for a make-believe elf game.

That kid never even groks the idea of modular rules because the first rules he encountered were opaque and awkward and complex and involved a lot of up-front investment.

The simplest rules have to be THE RULES, the first rules, the rules that every new player is exposed to if they read the book on their own. If the simplest rules aren't the first rules such a player encounters, it stacks the deck against getting new players invested. They cannot be optional, beginner's, introductory, or in any way not the ACTUAL rules of the game.

That's not worth giving up, even if most of the experienced player base isn't going to be that interested in introductory play. They don't actually functionally lose anything by it, so including it is a substantial net positive, without much of an actual down side.

 

[Falling Icicle]

Isn't the problem simply that by calling it Apprentice, some people will want to skip them? Simply have levels 1-20. If the first few levels pass quickly, and by level 3 you are able to reliably cast a level-1 spell and some cantrips, then fine. People will buy that game, or they won't.

The label serves only as an obstacle and a point of dissention.

It's not just a label. If all they were doing was labeling 1st and 2nd levels as the "apprentice levels," I wouldn't care one bit. But that's not all that they're doing. In the Q&A they even encourage people to start at level 3 (with 0xp if they don't want to miss out on any adventuring time). They also said the primary purpose is to streamline entry into a class for new players, implying that experienced players might as well just skip them. They're basically the "training wheel" levels. Anyone who already knows how to ride a bike isn't going to want to attach training wheels to their bike ever again.

 

[pemerton]

Put yourself in the mind of a kid who knows absolutely jack nothing about D&D

<snip>

Now imagine that kid reading the rules and being a little paralyzed by all the new information they're absorbing, seeing all those first level abilities, not really grokking them on first read, putting the book away, and having it gather dust because the game just seems way too complicated for a make-believe elf game.

I've got nothing against that.

My own view is that there are ways of doing that that are orthogonal to levels rather than part of the levelling scheme, but it's WotC's game and WotC's prerogative to design it their way.

My real concern inovlves putting myself in the mind of that kid and having my first PC die in the first encounter with a handful of bow-armed goblins. There is no doubt a time and place for D&D-as-hit-point-lottery, but the first session of that kid whom you mentioned isn't it.

 

[JamesonCourage]

I think the apprentice tier should be part of a module. They say this is to help beginners, but that is something that has a one-time value per person, ever. Everyone else is just going to skip it and go right to level 3.

I totally wouldn't. In my RPG system (levels 0-20), level 4 is described as "the average settled adult." Level 4. We don't always start at level 4 or higher. We start at 1-2 often, and higher often. I so, so don't agree with your "one-time value per person, ever" sentiment. As always, play what you like

 

[Li Shenron]

I think the apprentice tier should be part of a module.

...

But still, they could accomplish the same goal in other ways, like giving multiclass characters different stuff at level 1 than single class characters get.

I just want to point out that these 2 ideas would probably require a larger design effort than worth.