Starting level of new characters.

[cptg1481]

I played in a game where I had to start at 1st level when the party was 5th, 4th, and 3rd X 2. It sucked mightily though I did catch up quick. It was worse when another guy came in when I was 6th level and he had to start at 1st. The disparity between power levels lead to some insane jelousies and petty contests of will.

Interestingly enough when the DM's pet PC died at 10th level (the one who was 5th and ahead of the rest of us) this everybody starts at 1st level policy changed. The claim was in the interest of character survival.

I don't play in that group anymore.....

 

[Darkness]

... when the DM's pet PC died at 10th level (the one who was 5th and ahead of the rest of us) this everybody starts at 1st level policy changed. The claim was in the interest of character survival. ...

What level did he let that character start at, and what levels were the other PCs by that point?

 

[cptg1481]

What level did he let that character start at, and what levels were the other PCs by that point?

We were all like between 7th and 9th annd the pet PC was allowed to start at 8th. I couldn't take much more of that favoritism.

 

[Olive]

Like Psion, I bring in new characters at one level below the party average, for the same reason - it shouldn't be preferable to bring in a new character as opposed to having a character raised.

If I'm starting a campaign, it's 1st-level all the way baby!

This is exactly what I was going to post.

 

[Darkness]

We were all like between 7th and 9th annd the pet PC was allowed to start at 8th. I couldn't take much more of that favoritism.

Ouch!!

 

[Kahuna Burger]

...because I have always had 2 players that always show up for every session. If we game, they are there.

hijack, here. Have you ever found that this observation tends to morph into the reciprocal rule - if they can't be there, you don't neccassarily game?

I'm just curious, because I've often heard the "committment" justification for higher level characters in the party - you don't get XP if you aren't there, and bob is always there, so bob deserves his higher level PC. But in the cases I actually observe, I will see that if bob wouldn't be able to make it, the time or even venue will change to accomadate - whereas if sal can't make it, he just doesn't make it, no XP, its only fair cause bob makes the game all the time so he gets more...

While this sounds like an evenhanded rule, its easy for it to get turned around, either early on (surprise, surprise, the most popular/charismatic member of the gaming group ends up with the most powerful PC) or self perpetuating (gee, we can finish this module on a night where the 9th level cleric can make it, or the night that the 7th level bard can... guess who's getting XP for always showing up?)

This might just be me, but has anyone else seen this turnaround on the reward for being there rule?

Kahuna Burger

 

[John Crichton]

There aren't a whole lot of character deaths in my campaigns but when someone has to make a new character i usually start them within a level of the lowest party member with maybe some extra XP to get them started. If there is a new player, it all depends on when they join. If it's early I start them at average level. If we are in the middle of a campaign I would probably just wait to bring them in or have them start at a level below the lowest party member and give them a little extra XP to keep up.

 

[Creamsteak]

It is 100% situational for me, I tend to ask the player, "Well, what level do you think makes sense?"

And that always works. If the group is level 9, the player tends to say 7 or 8. If the group is level 4, the player tends to say 3 or 4. I'd rather they make that decision than me. If they honestly think it makes sense to start at level 10 with a 6th level group, thats honestly fine with me. If it becomes a problem, I'll do something, otherwise I don't mind.

 

[Glyfair]

My variation is that I bring players in one level lower than the lowest level character unless that would make them more than 1 1/2 levels below the party average.

 

[Ravellion]

Diaglo, you DM 3e right? Do you really start new PCs at 1st level when the game is say.... around 10th level?

I mean, this isn't 2e where that character would level 4 or 5 levels in that one session simply by standing at the back, since the doubling xp curve has been replaced by a slowly incremental one. How do the players handle being complete deadweight in combat (still something like 50% of the game IMC) for lots of sessions?

Rav