Why do levels one and two suck so bad?

[The_Gneech]

I've played in or run so many aborted "start at first level" games that I am tired of rats and kobolds. Plus, I tend to come up with character ideas that are a bit more well-rounded than the average 1st-level character can be. It's just the way my mind works. Not Mr. Huge Uber-Hero (in fact, I tend to get bored with characters around 11th level) ... just someone with a little more seasoning.

Again, I find myself looking back to my HERO System upbringing ... a full-fledged Fantasy HERO campaign would probably run, in a D&D equivalent, from 4th to 10th or so.

-The Gneech

 

[DM-Rocco]

Because you're not playing Star Wars Saga Edition?

I really love what they did with 1st level.

Cheers, -- N

Er, what did they do for first level? I would be interested in knowing.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

RULES
Because the randomness inherent to 1st and 2nd level D&D is much, much higher than what I want from an RPG (or most any game, really). Because low-level characters in D&D are *monumentally* incompetent, able to fail at otherwise trivial tasks. SAGA fixes both.

CHARACTER
Because the "budding adventurer" type holds almost no interest for me. I would much prefer to play a character who is already really good at what he does and has been doing it long enough to have an interesting background in it.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Why do players hate levels 1 and 2 so much?

The magic guy cant be magic guy in more than 2 encounters, the tough guy cant be tough guy for more than a hit, etc.

Moreover, most players have done the first level dance a dozen times before. They want to get to a level where their character's abilities are more fleshed out.

 

[DM-Rocco]

Personally I hate starting out at first level. You have very few options, if you are a spell caster, you will suck for a good long time and you can't even afford good equipment.

Yes, I know every hero starts from humble beginnings, but 1st level really blows. Grim and gritty rules are even worse, if you know of them, since you are essentially first level no matter what level you are. Playing in a G&G game for the last 3 years makes me never want to go back to 1st level play ever.

On the other hand, I really like DMing 1st level groups, although, I do house rules it up a bit and it tends to go quicker than a, "normal" game. For me, when I DM I really like DMing levels 5-12, after that, magic gets overpowered especially if you allow non-core books. Back in AD&D days I loved both DMing and playing high (over 20) level play. As a player, I love going up to epic levels, although, sadly, those rules are mainly broken.

Edit: Personally I think everyone should do the 1st level thing at least once. Then after, unless going for a quick progression, I start them out at 3rd or 4th level, sometimes 5th, unless doing an adventure path. I do like the idea that the guy mentioned earlier, start them at 3rd level but with 0xp. That gives them options, but you still get the growing levels and xp as you build your way up to level 4. Great idea.

 

[Baby Samurai]

Er, what did they do for first level? I would be interested in knowing.

Triple hp at first level.

A fighter would start with 30 hp, a wizard would start with 12 hp etc.

 

[The_Gneech]

Er, what did they do for first level? I would be interested in knowing.

First, being trained in a skill gives you a flat +5 bonus (and sometimes gives you access to abilities within the skill that untrained character don't have). You don't have skill points, but choose which skills you are Trained in from your character's class skills.

Second, characters get (hit die x 3) hit points at first level, making them considerably less fragile.

So basically, a 1st level Saga Edition character is closer to a 2nd-3rd level D&D character in terms of their capability and endurance.

-The Gneech

 

[Elf Witch]

I don't really like 1 and 2 level anymore. I have done it so many times and I find it boring. For one thing you are limited on background for your character. One of my favorite characters I brought in at tenth level after my last PC died. It was great because I was able to give her this really great background she had been an officer in the legions but had left after a battle where an entire dwarven clan had been wiped out.

She was questioning her loyalty to the Emperor. The DM did a great job working some of her backstory into the game.

Also because I was starting at first I could afford to take two levels in a class from Rokugan that allowed to me to make my fighter into a fullfledged knight who was educated and had decent ranks and bonuses in social skills.

also if you are multiclassing if you start at first level then it is hard to work that into the background.

When I dM we start at second to allow things like multiclassing.

 

[Shade]

I loathe the "killed by a cat" levels and plan on starting my next (and all subsequent) campaigns at 3rd level or higher.

 

[Hussar]

Since I get to play so rarely, I actually rather enjoyed 1st and 2nd level recently, but, more for the novelty than anything else. Having played in a campaign such as Emrikol plans, dragging out low levels for, IMHO, far too long, I'd never do it again. We played a 3e game for almost a year and a half and grossed a total of 4 levels. No thanks.

I like the idea of starting at 1st since it lets me get into the character a little better. However, three, four sessions at each of 1st and 2nd is more than enough thanks.