JDJblatherings
First Post
Nifft said:
Which is what Heroes do . Even when they are starting out.
Last edited:
Why do levels one and two suck so bad?
- Thread starter Emirikol
- Start date
Which is what Heroes do . Even when they are starting out.
Jeremy Ackerman-Yost
Explorer
Should that be an actual matter of luck, though? I would have thought it would be a rules assumption in an explicitly heroic game.JDJblatherings said:
JDJblatherings
First Post
I think Heroes are much more interesting if they rise to the call of heroism and aren't actually born to it. Sometiems the odds are against you and yuo still carry on and do what you have to do and if you prevail the story is that much better.
The notion of giving 1st level characters extra HP simply to survive, is appauling. Do orcs and kobolds get the extra hp becasue PCs are tougher? They do in hackmaster but that is becasue folks are more likely to take more damage becasue of that systems damage penetration and critical hits.
The notion of giving 1st level characters extra HP simply to survive, is appauling. Do orcs and kobolds get the extra hp becasue PCs are tougher? They do in hackmaster but that is becasue folks are more likely to take more damage becasue of that systems damage penetration and critical hits.
JDJblatherings
First Post
Canis said:
Why not actual luck? We do roll dice when we play D&D.
Jeremy Ackerman-Yost
Explorer
Sure, but we're talking about a situation where something like 70% of the possible die rolls yield "head-shot."JDJblatherings said:
Perhaps I'm just risk-averse (I don't like Las Vegas, either), but that's past where I'm prepared to call it "fun." YMMV, and clearly does.
The Levitator
First Post
In our games, tactics are absolutely essential because we run a very gritty game. Wouldn't tactics be even more important to squishy heroes that can't just go toe-to-toe with the monsters? I have 2 players in my game that have been playing since Chainmail, and they prefer lower levels because tactics play a more important role than characters with multiple attacks per round and a bucketfuls of feats and special abilities to rely on.
We run 1st level as the backstory for the characters. What I do is design some encounters based on key moments in the character's upbringing and we run the encounters like flashbacks in a movie. A little story set up, then the encounter, then a little wrap up on how that moment affected the character. It gives the players a chance to get to know their new character's abilities and limitations and makes creating backstories more fun. I run 1st level as solo adventures. We then start our group campaign at 2nd level. What I like to do for the players is create a "defining moment" for the party in the first group session that is with a ton of EXP, but has plenty of things built in that allow the party to use tactics to tip the scales in their favor. My goal with the first group campaign session is to try and level them up to 3rd. At that point we really start digging into the story.
My group is very good at using the environment to their advantage in encounters and have come up with some pretty creative ways of tricking their opponents to gain an advantage. The challenge for me will be staying one step ahead as they get more powerful so that they can still use team tactics and not get bored by having too many tricks in their bag.
I don't think there is a right or wrong way to apporach the start of a campaign. I do think there is a best way, and that's one that makes everyone in the group happy. Our way came about as a compromise because my old school gamers didn't want to just start out at a higher level. I wanted to try starting at a higher level, but my players preferred to start at first level. So I came up with the idea of using 1st level to flesh out back stories, and starting the group at 2nd level. And the party levelled after the first session, so we are essentially starting the campaign at 3rd level, and everyone is happy.
The whole idea of certain levels sucking over others just kinda goes over me. Our group is really a story-driven, cinematic kind of gaming group. We don't even use numbers in-game during combat; they rely on description. We use as little of the mechanics of the game as possible to tell the story, so I don't think we really care about levels or abilities or spells or feats, etc. The group just works with what they have at the moment to get from A to B.
I believe that strong, flexible storyline combined with a well prepared DM can go a long way to make any level of the game fun and exciting. It's a lot more work to make 1st level characters stand out as heroes than it is 10th level characters, to be sure. But as a DM who DM's because I love the storytelling aspect of the game, it's that very challenge that makes the game more fun for me at lower levels. And maybe the fact that I enjoy creating interesting and exciting hooks for low level play as much as high level play rubs off on my group and they don't get bored at the lower levels. Throughout history, very average people have done very extraordinary things and become heroes in the eyes of millions; without magical abilities, special powers or powerful items. Those are the kind of stories I like to use as inspiration when creating low level encounters. I believe that a charaters class level, feats, skill levels, spells, magic items, etc., have nothing to do with their capacity to be heroes. I've had a first level rogue save his village because he was able to escape his village while under siege and get to the next city to get help. I once had a 1st level bard become an overnight sensation because she saved the life of a choking dignitary while performing for him. Sure, no first level party is going to kill a dragon, but with a little creativity, one can come up with all kinds of opportunities for heroism that don't require special feats and +3 weapons.
I'm in no way saying that anyone who doesn't like low-level play is lacking in creativity or is wrong for how they feel. for some people, like my brother, it's all about being all-powerful and just kicking butt with a flick of the wrist. His take is, "hey, I'm normal in my daily life, when I game want to do all the things I can't do in real life." I don't think there's anything wrong with that approach either. I just don't think it's fair to say that certain things "suck" about a game just because that particular person or group deems it so. There are obviously a lot of people who prefer the lower levels and don't think they suck. Isn't that the beauty of roleplaying games? The fact that this game covers so much ground and gives anyone the kind of gaming experience they want to have is pretty cool in my book. I've had plenty of people give me crap because I play such a modified version of D&D. They are always like, "well, you know you aren't playing D&D anymore, so why not just use another system?" I've never understood that mentality. The rules to a roleplaying game are, to me, just tools to tell the story. If I like a majority of the tools I'm working with, and can modify some of those tools to work even better for me, why would I want to buy new tools? I'm all about telling a good interactive story that lets players tell their own stories with their characters. While I may very well find a system out there that more closely mirrors my idea of a good toolset for roleplaying, I've been playing D&D for 27 years. It's never failed to give me a lot of great memories and a lot of great stories, no matter which version I used. I find it very easy to understand, and easy to tweak. If I find something that doesn't really work for me or my groups tastes, we find a way to make it work. To me, that is the most fun aspect of DM'ing. Every aspect of D&D sucks to someone out there, because you can't please everyone. I've played a few other systems and D&D just feels the best for me. It's not perfect. No game trying to replicate reality in a magical world is perfect. But it's familiar and malleable, so I stick with it.
So is this the longest, "no, I don't think low levels suck" post yet?
We run 1st level as the backstory for the characters. What I do is design some encounters based on key moments in the character's upbringing and we run the encounters like flashbacks in a movie. A little story set up, then the encounter, then a little wrap up on how that moment affected the character. It gives the players a chance to get to know their new character's abilities and limitations and makes creating backstories more fun. I run 1st level as solo adventures. We then start our group campaign at 2nd level. What I like to do for the players is create a "defining moment" for the party in the first group session that is with a ton of EXP, but has plenty of things built in that allow the party to use tactics to tip the scales in their favor. My goal with the first group campaign session is to try and level them up to 3rd. At that point we really start digging into the story.
My group is very good at using the environment to their advantage in encounters and have come up with some pretty creative ways of tricking their opponents to gain an advantage. The challenge for me will be staying one step ahead as they get more powerful so that they can still use team tactics and not get bored by having too many tricks in their bag.
I don't think there is a right or wrong way to apporach the start of a campaign. I do think there is a best way, and that's one that makes everyone in the group happy. Our way came about as a compromise because my old school gamers didn't want to just start out at a higher level. I wanted to try starting at a higher level, but my players preferred to start at first level. So I came up with the idea of using 1st level to flesh out back stories, and starting the group at 2nd level. And the party levelled after the first session, so we are essentially starting the campaign at 3rd level, and everyone is happy.
The whole idea of certain levels sucking over others just kinda goes over me. Our group is really a story-driven, cinematic kind of gaming group. We don't even use numbers in-game during combat; they rely on description. We use as little of the mechanics of the game as possible to tell the story, so I don't think we really care about levels or abilities or spells or feats, etc. The group just works with what they have at the moment to get from A to B.
I believe that strong, flexible storyline combined with a well prepared DM can go a long way to make any level of the game fun and exciting. It's a lot more work to make 1st level characters stand out as heroes than it is 10th level characters, to be sure. But as a DM who DM's because I love the storytelling aspect of the game, it's that very challenge that makes the game more fun for me at lower levels. And maybe the fact that I enjoy creating interesting and exciting hooks for low level play as much as high level play rubs off on my group and they don't get bored at the lower levels. Throughout history, very average people have done very extraordinary things and become heroes in the eyes of millions; without magical abilities, special powers or powerful items. Those are the kind of stories I like to use as inspiration when creating low level encounters. I believe that a charaters class level, feats, skill levels, spells, magic items, etc., have nothing to do with their capacity to be heroes. I've had a first level rogue save his village because he was able to escape his village while under siege and get to the next city to get help. I once had a 1st level bard become an overnight sensation because she saved the life of a choking dignitary while performing for him. Sure, no first level party is going to kill a dragon, but with a little creativity, one can come up with all kinds of opportunities for heroism that don't require special feats and +3 weapons.
I'm in no way saying that anyone who doesn't like low-level play is lacking in creativity or is wrong for how they feel. for some people, like my brother, it's all about being all-powerful and just kicking butt with a flick of the wrist. His take is, "hey, I'm normal in my daily life, when I game want to do all the things I can't do in real life." I don't think there's anything wrong with that approach either. I just don't think it's fair to say that certain things "suck" about a game just because that particular person or group deems it so. There are obviously a lot of people who prefer the lower levels and don't think they suck. Isn't that the beauty of roleplaying games? The fact that this game covers so much ground and gives anyone the kind of gaming experience they want to have is pretty cool in my book. I've had plenty of people give me crap because I play such a modified version of D&D. They are always like, "well, you know you aren't playing D&D anymore, so why not just use another system?" I've never understood that mentality. The rules to a roleplaying game are, to me, just tools to tell the story. If I like a majority of the tools I'm working with, and can modify some of those tools to work even better for me, why would I want to buy new tools? I'm all about telling a good interactive story that lets players tell their own stories with their characters. While I may very well find a system out there that more closely mirrors my idea of a good toolset for roleplaying, I've been playing D&D for 27 years. It's never failed to give me a lot of great memories and a lot of great stories, no matter which version I used. I find it very easy to understand, and easy to tweak. If I find something that doesn't really work for me or my groups tastes, we find a way to make it work. To me, that is the most fun aspect of DM'ing. Every aspect of D&D sucks to someone out there, because you can't please everyone. I've played a few other systems and D&D just feels the best for me. It's not perfect. No game trying to replicate reality in a magical world is perfect. But it's familiar and malleable, so I stick with it.
So is this the longest, "no, I don't think low levels suck" post yet?
JDJblatherings
First Post
Nifft said:
who says tactics can't have a place with luck? Effective and clever tactics are very important and there are plenty of options open to 1st and 2nd level characters.
folks still got to roll those dice to make a save or score a hit.
Similar Threads
