Replacement characters..what level?
- Thread starter Emirikol
- Start date
MerakSpielman
First Post
most people do a level or two lower.
One level lower is like they died and got raised. No biggie. So two levels lower is a better "punishment" for letting a character die.
Bringing 'em in at first level is fun and cool until the rest of the party passes, oh, level 5 or so. Then they're just too fragile to do much except sit back, shoot an arrow (so they have "participated" in the fight), and level up.
One level lower is like they died and got raised. No biggie. So two levels lower is a better "punishment" for letting a character die.
Bringing 'em in at first level is fun and cool until the rest of the party passes, oh, level 5 or so. Then they're just too fragile to do much except sit back, shoot an arrow (so they have "participated" in the fight), and level up.
Emirikol
Adventurer
The rule that I've been using was one level less than the player's previous character because we have a diverse group (5th, 4thx2, 2ndx4). We also play in Hyboria, so characters are known to die frequently..but I don't want the group to be low level forever.
Some players kind of like "playing the NPC" once in a while too and are good, regular players. I don't want to punish them for helping out the DM and for being good players. Is it a good idea to be tacking on x.p. from the NPC to their PC levels? We just pretend that the PC is off adventuring elsewhere. Anybody tried that yet?
Em
..
Some players kind of like "playing the NPC" once in a while too and are good, regular players. I don't want to punish them for helping out the DM and for being good players. Is it a good idea to be tacking on x.p. from the NPC to their PC levels? We just pretend that the PC is off adventuring elsewhere. Anybody tried that yet?
Em
..
Celebrim
Legend
Usually, one or two levels less. It really depends on how long and what style of campaign you are running.
I use to run it at 1/2 half XP, which was roughly one level less in most cases in 1st edition. I'm not sure how well that would work for 3rd edition.
I'm also fond, after the campaign has run for a sufficient period, of turning over likely NPC's to player control.
I use to run it at 1/2 half XP, which was roughly one level less in most cases in 1st edition. I'm not sure how well that would work for 3rd edition.
I'm also fond, after the campaign has run for a sufficient period, of turning over likely NPC's to player control.
Orryn Emrys
Explorer
I've always preferred to bring 'em in one level lower than the lowest member of the party... until we got up there a ways. With characters in the upper teens, it can take a while to gain a level... and a player who feels that their character is irrevocably 'too far behind' can get discouraged... so I then start new PC's equal to the lowest level in the party. No one seems to mind that too much. Especially when we use the Forgotten Realms method of experience allocation. 
MerakSpielman
First Post
IMHO, a newly-introduced character should never be a higher level than if the dead character was raised. You gotta get punished for dying somehow.
Same level.
I don't quite get the concept of "Punishing" someone for the character dying. I try to make my game interesting enough that my players would rather lose a level and bring some one back a level lower than to take the short cut and take a new character at a level equal to the party average.
I don't puniish my players for playing their character wether that is making the herioc sacrfice or just having someone who thinks dying once is enough. If they died from stupidity losing that character is usually enough punishment and embarrassing as well.
Just my thoughts.
Later
I don't quite get the concept of "Punishing" someone for the character dying. I try to make my game interesting enough that my players would rather lose a level and bring some one back a level lower than to take the short cut and take a new character at a level equal to the party average.
I don't puniish my players for playing their character wether that is making the herioc sacrfice or just having someone who thinks dying once is enough. If they died from stupidity losing that character is usually enough punishment and embarrassing as well.
Just my thoughts.
Later
John Crichton
First Post
The game I am in now is varied. The DM is fair and usually a new PC starts within one level or at the same level of the lowest experienced party member. As of now, everyone is within 2 levels of each other which works for me as the guy @ Level 9 has yet to die so he should be the highest in XP.
When I DM, it really depends on the current level of the party and how many PC's there are. I usually like to run things below 10th level so if the average party is 4th level and there are 4 PC's I'd say to start the new PC @ 3rd. However with only 2 PC's, I'd more more inclined to have the new guy start off closer to the remaining member. It really depends on the situation...
When I DM, it really depends on the current level of the party and how many PC's there are. I usually like to run things below 10th level so if the average party is 4th level and there are 4 PC's I'd say to start the new PC @ 3rd. However with only 2 PC's, I'd more more inclined to have the new guy start off closer to the remaining member. It really depends on the situation...
