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

[TwoSix]

Not a fan. For games featuring tropes of novice adventurers facing kobolds and goblins, there are other game systems I prefer more (usually with less vertical scaling than D&D). Beyond the Wall and Stonetop are the first systems that come to mind I enjoy for those tropes.

For D&D play, I prefer more crunch and complexity, which is why my personal sweet spot is Tier 3 (levels 11-16). As a non-prep, fully improvisational GM, the ability of high-level class features to pull shenanigans is simply a narration challenge, not something that "breaks my prep".

 

[Bramhall]

Tier 2 is my sweet spot.

 

[bedir than]

We're running a low level campaign right now. One of the PCs might hit 6th level, but is talking about starting a new character at 1st rather than keep leveling

 

[monsmord]

Our new level 1 group just had our first serious combat encounter: 6 non-fighters against 10 (I think) twig, vine, and needle blights. They surprised us. My squishy gnome wizard with no armour and zero offensive or defensive spells took 10 needle damage off one shot in that surprise round, ending him. Some non-cleric with healing got him up the next round, and at my first opportunity I cast expeditious retreat and got well away from the melee. I returned the following round bearing two great branches of deadfall and proceeded to distract/confuse and partially blind a twig blight who was beating up on a comrade - I imagine it looked something like Uhura's fan dance (Star Trek V), but more aggressive and, somehow, even more silly.

With swingey, death-defying hijinks like this, what does a 20th level wizard have to offer? Wish? Pah!

To be fair, I'm looking forward to advancing, but for the character development and new spells/abililties to pursue his quest to unlock the secrets of the universe. The first few levels have always been my favourite, even though the later levels grant more butt-kicking.

 

[Dessert Nomad]

I don't really like Tier1, especially levels 1-2. Characters are too fragile, lack options, and lack reserves to draw on. A mage using mage armor has 2 spell slots to do anything with per day, and a new player often either conserves them too much or blows them on a minor fight and doesn't have them when they need them. 3-4 is much better, PCs have enough HP to soak a few things, enough resources to use abilities without it being feast or famine, and a variety of abilities with subclass and feat online. Starting at level 3 is definitely my preference.

Tier 2 is my favorite - you get access to lots of really cool spells like polymorph and 'blow things up' spells like all of the AOEs, and with some revivify and mass healing in the mix as a DM I don't have to worry about accidentally wiping out PCs. I enjoy tier 3, but it's harder to balance (especially story-wise) and the complexity gets in the way more. Tier 4 is fun but very gonzo, and it's extremely hard on the DM.

 

[Willie the Duck]

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

There's a lot to unpack with this. It might be helpful to note that I am one of those gamers that gets to play a lot of not-D&D (/D&D-alikes), and some of my answers bleed into other games.

First of all, I generally dislike pretty high-level A/D&D. I think it was discovered fairly early that people weren't stopping at 'name level' like EGG and co assumed they would and they had the opportunity to rebuild upper level monsters/spells/items towards a more cohesive (thematically and mechanically), but didn't and now there's a whole lot of discordant cruft (every bit of which is someone's favorite thing) all there not-working-well-together forever. So yeah, I love me some not-super-high-level D&D.

Secondly, I love me some low-stakes fantasy. There's a neigh-infinite amount of save-the-world style fantasy novels, tv shows, movies, video games, and so forth. I find it rather satisfying to play a game where saving the family farm or stopping a bandit crew is a major story arc (instead of a single week's events as you level up). One of the best gaming sessions I ever undertook was with a bunch of engineering-minded players and where the PCs were travelling with peasant pilgrims and a merchant, the ford had washed out, and they had to get all the people, animals, and wagons across a wide stream/small river (without the grain in the wagons getting wet, etc.), and without leaving the wagons unattended (and thus potentially captured by opportunistic thieves) by martial capable on either side of the river. That's a reason why I like lower-level D&D (/Beyond the Wall and other Stories), but that thematic style of gameplay is hardly specific to D&D (see also Stonetop, etc.).

However, D&D does have some challenges (to the fun aspect) at lower levels. As others have mentioned, low-level PCs are fragile and don't have a lot of responses to various things. The low-level fragility is a big thing because a lot of characters will be fine...fine...fine...dead in a way that later levels and many other games don't have or have more nuance towards (or at the very least you can take steps against).

Beyond that, It is fun before your spells can solve everything to have to play around with ropes and pitons and caltrops and this lock is rusty does anyone have oil and that one is covered in grease did anyone buy soap and all that stuff for a while. However, D&D has a lot of boolean effects (you are either invisible or not, petrified or not; no level-1 petrified), so there are a lot of situations where you run into situation X and it's just a dead-end/roll a new character/go beg or buy a solution from a higher-level NPC.

So yeah, I do have some issues with low-level D&D; but I do love the scope of play it sits in.

 

[Emerikol]

Let me say this was a thoughtful and interesting post regardless of my own takes.

There's a lot to unpack with this. It might be helpful to note that I am one of those gamers that gets to play a lot of not-D&D (/D&D-alikes), and some of my answers bleed into other games.

I was hoping for some more comparisons. I've been playing GURPS a lot of late.

First of all, I generally dislike pretty high-level A/D&D. I think it was discovered fairly early that people weren't stopping at 'name level' like EGG and co assumed they would and they had the opportunity to rebuild upper level monsters/spells/items towards a more cohesive (thematically and mechanically), but didn't and now there's a whole lot of discordant cruft (every bit of which is someone's favorite thing) all there not-working-well-together forever. So yeah, I love me some not-super-high-level D&D.

I'm not as sure as you that Gygax never intended advancement beyond name level. I do know he thought advancement would be slow. So 5 years minimum to reach 18th level. Those sorts of campaigns are rare these days.

Even at this level, I don't want a save the world adventure every week.

Secondly, I love me some low-stakes fantasy. There's a neigh-infinite amount of save-the-world style fantasy novels, tv shows, movies, video games, and so forth. I find it rather satisfying to play a game where saving the family farm or stopping a bandit crew is a major story arc (instead of a single week's events as you level up). One of the best gaming sessions I ever undertook was with a bunch of engineering-minded players and where the PCs were travelling with peasant pilgrims and a merchant, the ford had washed out, and they had to get all the people, animals, and wagons across a wide stream/small river (without the grain in the wagons getting wet, etc.), and without leaving the wagons unattended (and thus potentially captured by opportunistic thieves) by martial capable on either side of the river. That's a reason why I like lower-level D&D (/Beyond the Wall and other Stories), but that thematic style of gameplay is hardly specific to D&D (see also Stonetop, etc.).

Maybe you want even lower stakes than me but I can agree with your desire for simpler reasons for adventure. Rescuing someone taken in a raid or cleaning ratmen out of the sewers is fine as an adventuring reason. Everything does not have to be end of the world. You will notice that not one AD&D module was a save the world module. In rare cases the stakes might have been high but never earth shattering. Maybe I missed one but if so I'm sure it was rare.

However, D&D does have some challenges (to the fun aspect) at lower levels. As others have mentioned, low-level PCs are fragile and don't have a lot of responses to various things. The low-level fragility is a big thing because a lot of characters will be fine...fine...fine...dead in a way that later levels and many other games don't have or have more nuance towards (or at the very least you can take steps against).

Fragility is part of the fun for those that like lower levels. I don't think I'd want that all the time. But often the stories and alliances formed early on stay with the group. There was a wizard my group befriended when they were very low level. He helped them out a few times. Later in the campaign he needed help and they were on it.

Beyond that, It is fun before your spells can solve everything to have to play around with ropes and pitons and caltrops and this lock is rusty does anyone have oil and that one is covered in grease did anyone buy soap and all that stuff for a while. However, D&D has a lot of boolean effects (you are either invisible or not, petrified or not; no level-1 petrified), so there are a lot of situations where you run into situation X and it's just a dead-end/roll a new character/go beg or buy a solution from a higher-level NPC.

I think a game could more thoughtfully approach some forms of magic. For example, make teleport without a teleportation circle a higher level spell. Maybe rule that teleport creates a burst of energy that Wizards can sense when it happens nearby. So teleporting right into a dungeon could bring the enemy down on you. I've also thought anyone who teleports is perhaps stunned for one round upon arrival.

So yeah, I do have some issues with low-level D&D; but I do love the scope of play it sits in.

One thing about GURPS is that by my estimate a 250pt character is about 5th level so they tend to create more heroic types. I think this is related to their approach at building characters. I think if stats were generated you could tame that game a lot.

 

[Lanefan]

Having both played in and DMed nothing other than high-level games (with a brief exception during lockdown) for the last ten years or so, the idea of some very-low-level play is looking mighty good right now!

And by high-level I mean around (DMing) or well beyond (playing) the general point in 1e-adjacent at which the system's wheels start to come off..

I'm not as sure as you that Gygax never intended advancement beyond name level. I do know he thought advancement would be slow. So 5 years minimum to reach 18th level. Those sorts of campaigns are rare these days.

If he did intend advancement beyond name level he sure didn't design for it. As written, 1e works OK until about 10th level. Anything beyond that, you're kind of on your own.

Even at this level, I don't want a save the world adventure every week.

Maybe you want even lower stakes than me but I can agree with your desire for simpler reasons for adventure. Rescuing someone taken in a raid or cleaning ratmen out of the sewers is fine as an adventuring reason. Everything does not have to be end of the world. You will notice that not one AD&D module was a save the world module. In rare cases the stakes might have been high but never earth shattering. Maybe I missed one but if so I'm sure it was rare.

This specific element isn't an issue for me - sure I'll run a save-the-world setup for one adventure but the next might see them dealing with something very local, if still powerful. But it's easy to see how one can get stuck in a "how do I top this?" spiral.

Fragility is part of the fun for those that like lower levels.

That, and as the players aren't as attached to their characters they'll have them do (or try, anyway) more crazy gonzo things - which adds greatly to the entertainment value.

And the resulting turnover in party lineup keeps things fresh.

 

[Marc17]

I do, or at least I think those low levels are fun and necessary for development of the character and campaign. I've even been known to start the characters out at 0-th level and they had to work up to 1st level*. But I run concept campaigns and a lot of the lower levels are spent on interaction and exploration as they meet all the NPCs, become familiar with the setting, and work out what they want to do and how they fit in.

*When all you have is cantrips, some pretty good use can be made with those cantrips. Had one character use dancing lights to lead enemies away from where they were. I had to admit, I think that was the first time I have seen a character actually take Dancing Lights and use it, for which that use was perfect. Before that they were using it for illumination so when their lights went away from where they were, it looked natural.

 

[Willie the Duck]

Let me say this was a thoughtful and interesting post regardless of my own takes.
I was hoping for some more comparisons. I've been playing GURPS a lot of late.

I ran out of time. GURPS Fantasy is certainly a favorite. I will try to add more later.

I'm not as sure as you that Gygax never intended advancement beyond name level. I do know he thought advancement would be slow. So 5 years minimum to reach 18th level. Those sorts of campaigns are rare these days.

I don't believe that he thought people would never do it (we have some counter-examples from his groups in the iconic NPCs of the game). I do think he thought it would be something of the norm. Moreover, I think a lot of stuff from high levels (level 6+ spells, greater magic items, certain monsters) were designed around (ex.) being the ultimate boss monster for a level 9-11 group, not a reasonable encounter for a level 16 group, etc.

Maybe you want even lower stakes than me but I can agree with your desire for simpler reasons for adventure. Rescuing someone taken in a raid or cleaning ratmen out of the sewers is fine as an adventuring reason. Everything does not have to be end of the world. You will notice that not one AD&D module was a save the world module. In rare cases the stakes might have been high but never earth shattering. Maybe I missed one but if so I'm sure it was rare.

IME, 'save the world' is just a convenient shorthand. High-flying planar adventures counts as this level of epic-ness in my book, regardless of what (if anything) is saved. Likewise, a series of 3 adventures where you sequentially take on a fortress of the hill giants, a cavern of frost giants, and a hall of fire giants -- that's downright Beowulfian in epicness, and that was Gygax himself.

Fragility is part of the fun for those that like lower levels. I don't think I'd want that all the time. But often the stories and alliances formed early on stay with the group. There was a wizard my group befriended when they were very low level. He helped them out a few times. Later in the campaign he needed help and they were on it.

I think that might be enlightening. I think a lot of people like low-level play--provided that at some point it moves on (not going to call it moves up) to another playstyle as you progress. A game that starts and ends in low-levels, that would be interesting (and I wonder how many people would like it).

I think a game could more thoughtfully approach some forms of magic. For example, make teleport without a teleportation circle a higher level spell. Maybe rule that teleport creates a burst of energy that Wizards can sense when it happens nearby. So teleporting right into a dungeon could bring the enemy down on you. I've also thought anyone who teleports is perhaps stunned for one round upon arrival.

This is kinda the general point I was making. Regarding teleport specifically: The old 'scry and die' is one of the main reasons a lot of people dislike recent teleports. I know a lot of computer games (note: most of my experience being 20+ years old) tend to have models like 'you can teleport between town and the dungeon entrance (once you've found it), but not directly to the boss monster (sometimes not even away from the boss monster to the dungeon entrance)' something vaguely like that probably solves that problem.

One thing about GURPS is that by my estimate a 250pt character is about 5th level so they tend to create more heroic types. I think this is related to their approach at building characters. I think if stats were generated you could tame that game a lot.

I will definitely have to come back to discuss. I think the math on D&D characters, mapped to other systems, is decidedly nonlinear and possibly breaks attempts at formulation.