D&D 5E New Players same level as Current Players?

[abirdcall]

Ahhh I see. What I was trying to say is that we don't want anyone at the table to feel like they've been left behind or may not be able to contribute to the group because they can't do as much. That may not actually be the case, from a helping the party perspective. Though the player who is a level or two behind may still feel that way, regardless of how they help the party. So we make sure that no one has to feel like the little guy in the group and just keep everyone at the same xp level. If they need a hand with the extra character options, we just take a little time to help them out. No one in my group would have a negative opinion of another player or their character if they actually were of lower level. They would actually feel more protective of that character. We just want everyone at the table to feel more like the hero and less like the sidekick. Sidekicks are cool and all, but that's more a place for hirelings and other NPCs.

I think my point is that not all players think of things in these terms. If it works well for your group that is great. Your statements have implied that you believe these qualities to be true for all groups.

My group plays with differing levels and no one feels like a sidekick, or like a lesser contributor. We all contribute to the story equally. We all get equal spotlight time. And the characters all get a chance to develop.

I've known many DMs who have had very positive results. You may not have positive results. Intentionally including opportunities for catharsis is certainly not the only way to improve your game -- there are lots of ways! But if you are not including it then there is a good chance you are missing out on something.

This is just bizzare to me. I have provided therapy sessions for my friends. When I did though, we discussed informed consent ahead of time, established barriers, discussed confidentiality, and scheduled a specific time for it. During this time my role was to help them in a professional manner, in contrast to a typical friendship meeting where both parties engage with each other in mutually interesting topics.

The concept of giving secret therapy sessions to my friends is patronizing at best and unethical at worst to me.

The idea that we should all be striving to do this is bizzare to me.

 

[Iry]

I'll be honest, I can't say I'd be comfortable with that. As the son of a therapist, issues that require catharsis are ones that should be handled delicately in a personal environment. Now that might be your game, but that has not, IME been the games I have played in. That aside, even with your friends you have no guarantee on how they will react and such moments need to be properly handled and channeled to create good growth. It's possible you're a therapist, but that to me makes matters worse, you're attempting to provide therapy for people who may not want it and doubly worse, you're injecting yourself into their lives by assuming they need it.

You bring up some really important concerns and I will do my best to address them. My persuasion roll may not be up to snuff, though, so bear with me here. Nobody is suggesting that anyone should include situations in their game that address deep life traumas. Those are the kinds of things you should leave to a licensed specialist, and including them without consent would be seriously unethical! So we are definitely not talking about those kinds of deep issues. We are talking about understanding your players well enough to know what kinds of things might make them happy, and then including those opportunities in a game. I will repost some of my examples from earlier in the thread:

Player A is an explorer who just wants to experience what kind of cool story I am telling. I do some digging to find out what genres and tropes she likes and dislikes, then make sure she encounters (or avoids) those tropes to a moderate degree in-game.

Player B has been passed up for promotion twice and seems really bummed about it. I make sure she encounters situations where she can be better recognized for her accomplishments and maybe an authority figure is willing to give her more responsibility (if she rolls well -- these are not freely given).

Player C wants to talk trash to NPCs because he has to be extremely nice and diplomatic in his workplace. Since he needs to blow off some steam now and then, I make sure to arrange some situations where he has an easier time getting away with talking trash to NPCs. Doing so is ultimately his choice, of course.

We are talking about knowing if your player really enjoys the power fantasy of killing a bunch of trash mobs in a fight and providing the occasional fight where she can shine and blow away a bunch of trash mobs. Knowing that your player absolutely loves a good mystery and including one she can attempt to solve once in a while. Knowing that your player absolutely loves action scenes and does something insanely reckless almost every other game, then providing an action set piece where she can have the spotlight and be a daredevil every now and then.

Please do not get hung up on the word 'Therapy'. Jester is the one who started using it.

 

[Horwath]

New characters should start at party level. We dont even use xp anymore but level when it seems apropriate.

IF new player is new to the rules, you could give him 1st level character but with HP, proficiency bonus of party level.
That way it has few abilities to learn at start but has HP to not be one-hit-kill.

 

[Sunseeker]

You bring up some really important concerns and I will do my best to address them. My persuasion roll may not be up to snuff, though, so bear with me here. Nobody is suggesting that anyone should include situations in their game that address deep life traumas. Those are the kinds of things you should leave to a licensed specialist, and including them without consent would be seriously unethical! So we are definitely not talking about those kinds of deep issues. We are talking about understanding your players well enough to know what kinds of things might make them happy, and then including those opportunities in a game. I will repost some of my examples from earlier in the thread:

Player A is an explorer who just wants to experience what kind of cool story I am telling. I do some digging to find out what genres and tropes she likes and dislikes, then make sure she encounters (or avoids) those tropes to a moderate degree in-game.

Player B has been passed up for promotion twice and seems really bummed about it. I make sure she encounters situations where she can be better recognized for her accomplishments and maybe an authority figure is willing to give her more responsibility (if she rolls well -- these are not freely given).

Player C wants to talk trash to NPCs because he has to be extremely nice and diplomatic in his workplace. Since he needs to blow off some steam now and then, I make sure to arrange some situations where he has an easier time getting away with talking trash to NPCs. Doing so is ultimately his choice, of course.

We are talking about knowing if your player really enjoys the power fantasy of killing a bunch of trash mobs in a fight and providing the occasional fight where she can shine and blow away a bunch of trash mobs. Knowing that your player absolutely loves a good mystery and including one she can attempt to solve once in a while. Knowing that your player absolutely loves action scenes and does something insanely reckless almost every other game, then providing an action set piece where she can have the spotlight and be a daredevil every now and then.

Please do not get hung up on the word 'Therapy'. Jester is the one who started using it.

That's not exactly what it sounded like when you were advertising including catharsis in games. I mean, doesn't every DM take into account what their players do and don't enjoy? Doesn't seem like a table would really hold together very long if they didn't.

But if that's all you were talking about, ya know, covering the small stuff, well okay.

 

[Iry]

I mean, doesn't every DM take into account what their players do and don't enjoy? Doesn't seem like a table would really hold together very long if they didn't.

Jester (and to a lesser extent, Ad_Hoc) seem to be arguing against doing so, on the grounds that it would interfere with the sandbox experience. I have been trying to convince them of all the positive benefits of doing so in moderation.

 

[Two Starving Gnolls]

As long as the new players know how to play the game, I would say they can start at the same level as the others.

 

[Mallus]

The recent topic-drift has me wanting to run a modern day game where the PCs are all amateur, unlicensed, freelance psychotherapists. I'd use Fiasco!

Anyhow, on-topic. All PCs are the same level (or XP total). We don't run a sandbox in the old-school sense, so leveling a PC isn't the way you keep score (i.e., the goal of the game).

 

[Sunseeker]

Even if they don't, I start them at the same level. In my current game I had 3 players that had some past experience of earlier dnd editions and 2 players that had no experience whatsoever. Of course, I started them all at level 3 and, really, our first few sessions were learning experiences for everyone. Once we finished I gave everyone the chance to rebuild their character or even change it to something new. Everyone had a lot of fun, I think it worked out well.

Emphasis mine.

I think this is important especially for new players and is why I am not particularly strict on when characters can be retired, exchanged or retooled. I want people to have fun with what they're playing and I don't want them to feel like they're being forced to stick with a class or character they're not happy with. I'm a little more restrictive with my more skilled players, because I know they tend to be doing it to game the system or otherwise get an edge, so they'll typically have to wait until we reach a town, or a city, sure, their character can always just wander off, but that's no promise I'm going to get their new character walk into the void. But this is very much on a case-by-case basis and I will talk to my players about it beforehand.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

I also agree with [MENTION=6788732]cbwjm[/MENTION] and [MENTION=93444]shidaku[/MENTION], giving players (inexperienced or otherwise) the chance to rebuild their character or even change to something new is a very easy thing to do and helps players in a variety of ways (which I don't really think is appropriate to this topic to go into in detail, so I won't).

However, I extend the option to rebuild a character or switch to an entirely different character to all of my players at any time, with the only stipulation being that the player switching characters has to help me figure out how to bring the new character into the campaign as fluidly and rapidly as possible.

Actually, I even go so far as to have players update or alter characters for no reason more than that a new book came out with mechanical options they might have chosen if we'd started the campaign now, rather than months ago (i.e. the monk in one of my campaigns was a way of the open hand monk until the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide came along with the way of the sun soul, which the player certainly would have chosen at 3rd level if it was available at the time, so we switched it over without any in-character hoop-jumping required).

 

[Lanefan]

POLL:
Cannot answer poll as none of the options reflect what I do.

For a new PLAYER entering a campaign in progress, that player's first character will be the average level of the party it is entering.

For a new CHARACTER of an existing player in a campaign in progress, or a second one being brought in by a new player concurrently with her first, it'll come in at either 1 level lower than the lowest in the party being entered, or at an arbitrary "floor" level I set that slowly rises as the campaign goes along.

WHAT IS PLAYED:
In my games players are encouraged to have more than one character on the go, and often play a couple of 'em in any given party. They can cycle these characters in and out between adventures (or even during adventures if the party stops off in town) as they wish, as long as it makes a small modicum of in-game sense. Levels vary, though it's rare to see more than a 4-level spread within any given party unless henches or hirelings are counted. Right now the two parties in my game are 6-9 (soon to be 6-10) and 4-8 (I think; that one's been on hold for some time while we play the 6-9 crew).

GAME AS THERAPY:
Just...no.

Lan-"it's a pretty safe bet that anybody playing in my games as therapy will leave in worse shape than when they arrived"-efan