Starting without equipment

[nookiemonster]

Back when I was addicted to Diablo II, there was a player who blogged about playing a "n00d sorceress", that is a sorceress character who used no equipment at all. Since PCs in D&D can loot the equipment that monsters carry, a stupid idea occurred to me: start your PC with no equipment at all, except maybe spending 1 gp on some clothes. Running around without any pants on is probably a bit extreme, except for Barbarians or maybe those tree-hugging Druids. Just use any weapons and armour that you can steal from the monsters you kill. Anyone tried this? Might work in a campaign where the players start off as slaves in the Underdark, or in Dark Sun. Thoughts?

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Had a DM do this to me once. I think he was expecting me to use my pathetic pickpocket chance to gain some needed cash. However, we just dragged some likely mark into a dark ally and brained him with a 2 x4 and looted his unconcious body.

Doing it in a dungeon, I suppose it could work in 4e, I would not fancy it in any other version of D&D though, or most other games I have tried.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Just had an adventure starting without equipment and actually without weapon proficiencies, class powers etc at all...

Find stuff, kill monsters, take their stuff... worked pretty well.

You just have to design encounters with this in mind...

 

[ourchair]

Back when I was addicted to Diablo II, there was a player who blogged about playing a "n00d sorceress", that is a sorceress character who used no equipment at all. Since PCs in D&D can loot the equipment that monsters carry, a stupid idea occurred to me: start your PC with no equipment at all, except maybe spending 1 gp on some clothes. Running around without any pants on is probably a bit extreme, except for Barbarians or maybe those tree-hugging Druids. Just use any weapons and armour that you can steal from the monsters you kill. Anyone tried this? Might work in a campaign where the players start off as slaves in the Underdark, or in Dark Sun. Thoughts?

I wholly approve of this.

And admire any of my players who would go along with it.

 

[jester_gl]

As a DM I converted the introduction dungeon from D&D basic to 4th edition, which had the PC starting locked in a cell deep in a dungeon. The rogue was puny, the fighter was cleaving with his fists, and the druid...well not having equipment didn't affect her at all.

The rogue quickly took hold of a rusty dagger, the warrior got a club or something, and they eventually escaped.

 

[drothgery]

Hmm... the thing is that some classes can get by a lot easier without relatively expensive weapons and armor than others (there's no difference between using an implement power without an implement and using it with a mundane, standard implement unless you've got class features or feats that key off of implement type; classes designed to wear light armor can get by with none a lot easier than classes designed to wear heavy armor), so unless you want a party skewed that way, or the PCs will be able to 'acquire' equipment very quickly (i.e. no more than one combat encounter), I don't think I'd go there.

 

[Shin Okada]

The one problem you should have in mind is that some PCs will suffer much from it, while the others don't.

Assuming the game starts at L1 or at low-heroic tier, Implement wielders don't suffer much from it as they can use implement powers without implements at all. On the other hand, weapon wielders do suffer much, as unarmed strike is far much weaker than, say, a maul.

On defense, characters relying on armor (and shield) will suffer much, while non-armored or lightly armored character don't suffer much.

If the game starts from med-heroic-tier or later, PCs will be far much weaker than they are expected to be.

Also note that a wizard who don't have their spell book still have trouble as all of their Utility and Daily powers are written on it.

If you cont all of those factors on your mind, you may run some interesting adventure. But it will need careful design to make it an enjoyable one instead of just a stressful one to your players.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I started a 3E campaign like this, as the characters were all late-teens, early 20s townsfolk in a fishing village that was down the coast from a pirate camp. They all started equipment-less, as they were just young adults and not yet "adventurers" (I also started them as "level 0"). When they decided to deal with the problem of the pirates, they began rummaging through their own houses and barns to acquire stuff, found/borrowed whatever weapons they could get their hands on (scythes from one of the farms, daggers, staves etc.) and put together basic sets of armor they could find.

Then, as they began their new "careers", they also began to loot those enemies they came upon, such that when they finally earned enough XP to become "level 1" adventurers, they had found/bought/looted enough equipment to have the equivalent of what you'd normally have at first level.

The players like it that one time just because it was a cool couple sessions to go through the experience of "becoming" an adventurer.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Just note that such a scenario will totally screw anyone playing a rogue because they can't use sneak attack or any powers without having a crossbow or light blade.

Everyone else in the game can still use powers while nekkid or with improvised weapons, but not rogues.

 

[LuckyAdrastus]

4e isn't really set up for this. You can certainly do it, but some classes are heavily affected (fighters, rogue) and others take no penalty (wizard, monks).

Also, non-magical equipment in 4e is extremely cheap. The 100g you get at start can buy whatever non-magical equipment almost any character could need. So as soon as the party finds the level 1 treasure parcels you're supposed to give them, and have access to a trading shop, they'll be fully kitted out.

Over the long run, the game math assumes you give treasure out at the suggested levels, OR that you use the inherent magic item enhancement system, in which case you can give out less treasure.