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

[Pvt. Winslow]

I've always viewed death to be all the punishment a player needs. It means you lose your character, one you may have invested tens of hours of your time playing, and whom your best stories are about. To be forced to come back at a lower level, or even 1st Level, seems overly harsh to me.

I definitely understand the style of some games being more likely to do this than others, and sometimes a new player may benefit from starting at lower level, but that's for their first character, not for when they die.

Really, someone saying your punishment for death is to be a lower level shows that they don't understand the true punishment is saying goodbye to a character you may love.

 

[ad_hoc]

I've always viewed death to be all the punishment a player needs. It means you lose your character, one you may have invested tens of hours of your time playing, and whom your best stories are about. To be forced to come back at a lower level, or even 1st Level, seems overly harsh to me.

I definitely understand the style of some games being more likely to do this than others, and sometimes a new player may benefit from starting at lower level, but that's for their first character, not for when they die.

Really, someone saying your punishment for death is to be a lower level shows that they don't understand the true punishment is saying goodbye to a character you may love.

Why is starting at a lower level necessarily a punishment?

I like playing the game. I don't want my game artificially shortened by having levels taken away from me.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Why is starting at a lower level necessarily a punishment?

For the same reason that having to start from the beginning of a level is a punishment in a video game: re-doing progress you've already made just feels different from making that progress for the first time.

Of course, something being a punishment doesn't mean it is an unacceptable or overly severe punishment.

I like playing the game. I don't want my game artificially shortened by having levels taken away from me.

Why do you feel that the end of the game is inherently tied to level? That's not an inherent fact of the D&D game (even without rules like epic boons, there is nothing that says the game has to end as soon as you get to 20th level).

 

[the Jester]

I run an "Everyone Starts at First Level" (ES@1) game. It has never yet caused a problem, and most parties in my campaign end up with mixed levels due to different pcs having been around for different numbers of games and so on. Last night, for instance, we played a session that included pcs at level 3, 4, 6, 7, 7 and 13. (To be fair, the 13th level guy got a 50,000 xp boost from a deck of many things.) Between bounded accuracy, low-level monsters remaining prevalent in my campaign regardless of party level (and remaining a threat in numbers), smart play on the part of the low-level players and various things that 5e does to enable mixed level groups (aid being one extraordinarily good example), it has (so far) always worked out just fine.

 

[manduck]

In our group, new players start at the same level and xp as everyone else. It's easier for the DM to balance things. The new player doesn't have to feel inferior to the rest of the group. If they are totally new to the game of D&D, everyone at the table helps them out. It's a social game we play with people we like. No reason to be a jerk and refuse to help the new guy or try to show your superiority with your character that's cooler than theirs. Let them come into the group on equal terms. Everyone should be able to have fun at the table on equal terms.

 

[Pvt. Winslow]

Why is starting at a lower level necessarily a punishment?

I like playing the game. I don't want my game artificially shortened by having levels taken away from me.

In some cases I can sympathize with not wanting to lose out on the fun of gaining levels, but in the other hand I mostly DM and I know the pain of trying to DM mixed level parties. You have to tailor the challenges far more than if the party is the same level. If the rest of the party is level 9 and you make characters always start at 1st, a single fireball or even magic missile will kill them.

The ways around this are to ignore that character or not put in fireballs, but that means in both cases you have to change your encounter tactics or abilities because what would normally be challenging to your PC's becomes certain death for one of them.

I'd hate to be that character, doomed to an existence of constant deaths and hiding until the other players kill enough monsters for you to level up on their scraps.

 

[ad_hoc]

For the same reason that having to start from the beginning of a level is a punishment in a video game: re-doing progress you've already made just feels different from making that progress for the first time.

Wait, so you are only going to play through 1 campaign in 5e?

I enjoy having each character advance. For me, having played through a campaign from 1-15 with a Wizard, playing a new campaign with a Fighter doesn't feel like I am redoing my progress. Same with playing a new character if the old one died or whatever.

In our group, new players start at the same level and xp as everyone else. It's easier for the DM to balance things. The new player doesn't have to feel inferior to the rest of the group. If they are totally new to the game of D&D, everyone at the table helps them out. It's a social game we play with people we like. No reason to be a jerk and refuse to help the new guy or try to show your superiority with your character that's cooler than theirs. Let them come into the group on equal terms. Everyone should be able to have fun at the table on equal terms.

We're not jerks at our table. We play as a social game so we don't measure character power against each other. I am sorry that is how your group sees the game.

In some cases I can sympathize with not wanting to lose out on the fun of gaining levels, but in the other hand I mostly DM and I know the pain of trying to DM mixed level parties. You have to tailor the challenges far more than if the party is the same level. If the rest of the party is level 9 and you make characters always start at 1st, a single fireball or even magic missile will kill them.

I don't advocate starting at level 1 in 5e. 1 and 2 are apprentice levels that are designed to go by very quickly. I prefer starting at either level 3 or 5 depending on where the rest of the party is.

I also don't tailor challenges to the party. Challenges are what they are regardless of character classes or levels.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Wait, so you are only going to play through 1 campaign in 5e?

That is very much not what I said, or even related to it in any way.

 

[Pvt. Winslow]

I don't advocate starting at level 1 in 5e. 1 and 2 are apprentice levels that are designed to go by very quickly. I prefer starting at either level 3 or 5 depending on where the rest of the party is.

I also don't tailor challenges to the party. Challenges are what they are regardless of character classes or levels.

So you do agree in a sense that starting a character off at a low level when they die isn't always the best idea, especially if you're saying you up the level they start at depending on the level of the party.

Also, if you don't tailor your challenges, then how do you avoid killing a 3rd level PC with an errant fireball? Do you not use mages as foes often? Or do your players know to hide and stay in the back after they make a new character until they level up from just being in the party?

 

[hejtmane]

It really depends on where we are the group all that comes into play and the person. Then again other then starting a fresh group that has never played before do i start at 1st level most the time we start at 3rd level the first two are mind numbing boring some times plus 3rd has the start of the fun stuff. I would say it is all situational depending on the group and campaign