D&D General Who else is a fan of low level games?

[Clint_L]

I love low level D&D. Tier 1. The characters are just starting out, so stakes are local and personal. In 5e, and especially 5.5e, characters have enough of a toolkit so each feels unique and has a role, but there is less decision paralysis. Treasure is meaningful, and you don’t need heaps of it, so the economy makes semi-sense.

Combats are shorter. Lots of iconic monsters live at these levels. Kobolds are a threat, ogres are scary, and a manticore can be a terrifying opponent. And threat levels are a bit higher; characters have fewer HP and there’s no revivify on tap.

As a forever DM, I find lower level games easier to prep.

For these and many other reasons I love tier 1 D&D and always have, but I fear I am in the minority. Many players prefer to zip through these levels ASAP, or just start at level 3 or above.

Who else loves low level D&D, and why? Or why not?

Note: this is not a knock on higher level games at all! Sometimes I love them too! But I kind of miss 1e, where getting to level 5 was an epic journey. The Monster Manual still kind of reflects that, with so many of the classic monsters aimed at the low level game that, these days, is over too soon, IMO.

 

[Gorck]

I completely agree with everything you said.

So I guess I have no notes, other than to add that low level campaigns are obviously easier for onboarding new players as well, since there are fewer options to potentially overwhelm them (the aforementioned Analysis Paralysis). And starting at level 1 allows new players to get the hang of simple things like the flow of combat (melee attacks, cantrip use, the occasional level 1 spell), using their various skills, how resting works, etc. Then, when they level up to 2 and beyond, they slowly add a few more options to their toolkit.

 

[Lazybones]

I have almost always begun my campaigns at level 1, but they require careful scenario design, since even a sub-CR1 monster can easily kill first-level characters outright on a single critical hit. Several of the low-CR monsters in the 5.5e Monster Manual have been boosted in ways that make instant-kills more likely (giant spider and hobgoblin warrior, I'm looking at you). Even second- and third-level characters can go down fast if these boosted beasties go on a roll of good luck. If your players are fine with having their starter characters killed in the first session, then that's fine, but the norm these days seems to have players investing more time and effort into their characters. It's certainly different from the Basic days when almost every hit could kill you and you had to bring a folio of character sheets to your run through Keep on the Borderlands.

I do like playing through those early levels, as I find that they often contain defining moments that can shape a character or an adventuring group's entire career. I've seen several groups that chose a team name based on something that happened in an early adventure.

 

[AlViking]

I enjoy all levels of play for different reasons. But low level play often means a more creative and careful approach instead of just running headlong into danger and blasting away.

It's also a time when people are figuring out who their characters really are and what the group really wants to pursue. Creating that initial vibe before the personalities and goals are more settled.

 

[Gorck]

Another thing that just came to mind is that the rumor is the new WoW book will have players start at level 3 (presumably because the WOW->D&D class conversions will require subclasses to facilitate). This is new territory for me since I also always start campaigns at level 1. And I already have a couple WoW players who are interested in learning D&D when this book comes out. So that’ll be an interesting conundrum for me.

 

[CellarHeroes]

I have and always will start campaigns at Level 1. Nowadays there are just too many skills, talents, powers, perks, and other goodies for someone to be able to keep track of when they appear all at once. As a player and a GM I've enjoyed earning those things gradually.

 

[Pamphylian]

Yes - for 5e the early levels are the sweet spot for me. In addition to what you said, it is a tier where mundane challenges and threats still can be the bread and butter of adventuring. Crevasses, climbs, bad weather, mechanical traps, basic adventuring items, maybe even darkness (if your party is not stacked with darkvision). These things can be easily to concretely imagine, reason about, solve problems with and are part of life experience and fiction, so they are naturally relatable. Their obsolescence at higher levels requires more magical and abstract challenges - still fun, but less undergirded by concretely relatable things.

 

[Distracted DM]

I get burnt the frig out on running higher level games (lvl 11+). So tired of Save the World stories, too.

I much prefer the first couple tiers of play; yes, the fastest play is at early levels... one of the things I actually like a lot about those first couple levels is that characters' mundane equipment is often taken into account a lot more, because the characters themselves don't have a crazy number of features yet. So they'll look at their inventories for improvisation etc. And yes, more limited actions and abilities at lower levels means turns move faster.

 

[RageKage2250]

My view is I just enjoy playing D&D with my friends, and more often than not, I am a player/adventurer as opposed to DM. My friends usually decide to keep the tier/levels fairly low, usually maxing out at level 7 or 8. This doesn't bother me at all, outside of levels 1 and 2, I enjoy Tier 1 play.

I recently got an opportunity to join a high level campaign starting at level 10 for a heavily modified Vecna Eve of Ruin campaign. I'm enjoying that too, and it's cool to cast high level spells here and there.

When I DM, I only do one-shots, so I don't really care what level we're doing as long as the players are experienced and understand how their characters work.

If I were to ever attempt a long-term campaign again, I'd probably want to keep things in single digit levels of play to reduce prep time.

 

[Emerikol]

I love low level D&D. Tier 1. The characters are just starting out, so stakes are local and personal. In 5e, and especially 5.5e, characters have enough of a toolkit so each feels unique and has a role, but there is less decision paralysis. Treasure is meaningful, and you don’t need heaps of it, so the economy makes semi-sense.

Combats are shorter. Lots of iconic monsters live at these levels. Kobolds are a threat, ogres are scary, and a manticore can be a terrifying opponent. And threat levels are a bit higher; characters have fewer HP and there’s no revivify on tap.

As a forever DM, I find lower level games easier to prep.

For these and many other reasons I love tier 1 D&D and always have, but I fear I am in the minority. Many players prefer to zip through these levels ASAP, or just start at level 3 or above.

Who else loves low level D&D, and why? Or why not?

Note: this is not a knock on higher level games at all! Sometimes I love them too! But I kind of miss 1e, where getting to level 5 was an epic journey. The Monster Manual still kind of reflects that, with so many of the classic monsters aimed at the low level game that, these days, is over too soon, IMO.

One this I agree with you. I love those early levels too. I like all the levels for one reason or another but there is something special about starting out new.

I also think the game is designed to go must faster than it did. When it takes 5 real years playing EVERY week to get to 18th level then you don't have many games that get to 18th level. We played in the 7th to 12th level ranges for a very long time.