Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8189522" data-attributes="member: 6790260">So where do I go to find these mythical DMs that are willing start at the level I might possibly like to play? It would definitely make a difference in my interest.I have literally found ZERO DMs thus far who were willing to even momentarily consider it. One had the patience to let me make an argument for it, and then said (essentially) "no, this is what's going to happen, it will be fine." (Spoiler alert: it was not fine.)I grant that a lack of "schlub" support was a flaw of 4e. I have never said otherwise. But I think you are far, far too quick to dismiss the "semantic" problem. Many many many many DMs see "1st level" and automatically--even reflexively--treat that as the necessary starting point for 100% of games. That may be simply an "error" of many DMs conflating this numeral value with an efficacious or procedural value. However, the error is so widespread, it seems much more practical (since we're already talking about a hypothetical 6e) to just accept that humans are silly in this particular way and design the game to short-circuit it.The even bigger problem though? Newbie players and newbie DMs. I've seen three different novice DMs give up on DMimg 5e because of the incredible swinginess of the game, having one party punch three levels above its weight while another gets 1 death saving throw shy of a TPK on a merely slightly difficult fight. (I was, unfortunately, in the near-TPK group. This has happened 3 out of 4 times I've tried 5e where we had to start at 1st level.) New players benefit from a smoother and simpler introduction, yet also from getting to play a cool concept right away, and from not being horribly punished for errors made while they're still learning. Brutal lethality at lower levels is, yes, (somewhat) supportive of the older-school playstyle, but anti-supportive of newbie players, unless it's specifically opted into by the group and the new player is made aware that that is what they're getting. Bumping up to 3rd or even 5th level is anti-supportive for newbie players because they now have far more THINGS to figure out, pushing the already-high barrier of entry even higher. I agree, and think the best way to address this is to make rules for each thing, that are well-supported and neither deprecated nor pushed, rather each getting its use cases discussed and advice offered for how to make each sing.I am extremely cautiously optimistic, yes. But again, this would be significantly more than the "customization usually present at the table" idea (paraphrased) from the poster I quoted earlier.Which is why, as I said above, I advocate explicit, well-supported, and (ideally) indefinitely extensible zero-level rules. That way, any variation along the line between "schlub" and "competent adventuring hero" is covered, including "schlub to super-schlub," for those who never want to become "heroic" at all!It's how I do as well. But we live in the age of "DM empowerment," where the rules are suggestions, and the actual suggestions and advice are like the Imperial Senate: remnants to be swept away.</blockquote>

Verification