Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Quickleaf" data-source="post: 5845263" data-attributes="member: 20323">[MENTION=2067]Kamikaze Midget[/MENTION] I've seen this argument in several posts and I wonder if it's a sentiment you share? Basically the argument is that level 1 should be gritty peasants as you describe; the rationale being that if a group wants to play as higher powered adventurers out the gate they can simply start play at, say, level 5. However, the argument goes, if they make PCs competent adventurers from level 1, then there's no recourse for folks who want a grittier level 1 game.However, increasing level increases complexity for most classes in most editions (the BX fighter and rogue being the main exceptions). I'm assuming that this will be true in 5e.Say I am running a game for friends who aren't hardcore gamers who want to kick ass without worrying about death around every corner; they want to play heroes like in the movies not dungeon survival horror......and if starting at level 5 were the way the rules let us accomplish that......then the players have a really sharp learning curve to overcome with the character options (unless you make the first 5 levels really simple...in which case there isn't a sense of character advancement).I'd like for both &quot;gritty peasant with a sword&quot; and &quot;skilled adventurer starting out&quot; to be accommodated at level 1, but it sure seems tricky to do.Personally I'd be happy if they abandoned &quot;tiers&quot;, both the terminology and the concept.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Quickleaf, post: 5845263, member: 20323"] [MENTION=2067]Kamikaze Midget[/MENTION] I've seen this argument in several posts and I wonder if it's a sentiment you share? Basically the argument is that level 1 should be gritty peasants as you describe; the rationale being that if a group wants to play as higher powered adventurers out the gate they can simply start play at, say, level 5. However, the argument goes, if they make PCs competent adventurers from level 1, then there's no recourse for folks who want a grittier level 1 game. However, increasing level increases complexity for most classes in most editions (the BX fighter and rogue being the main exceptions). I'm assuming that this will be true in 5e. Say I am running a game for friends who aren't hardcore gamers who want to kick ass without worrying about death around every corner; they want to play heroes like in the movies not dungeon survival horror... ...and if starting at level 5 were the way the rules let us accomplish that... ...then the players have a really sharp learning curve to overcome with the character options (unless you make the first 5 levels really simple...in which case there isn't a sense of character advancement). I'd like for both "gritty peasant with a sword" and "skilled adventurer starting out" to be accommodated at level 1, but it sure seems tricky to do. Personally I'd be happy if they abandoned "tiers", both the terminology and the concept. [/QUOTE]

Verification