Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 2551665" data-attributes="member: 3192">This does sound like a problem.  Who wants to be the weakest character right?  The justification for this unhappy situation comes from both the need for consequences and realism.#1 I mentioned before players needing the possibility of failure for their accomplishments to mean anything.  If a player can sit and do nothing and their character keeps advancing up in level charts, what incentive is there for them to risk their character anyways?  Moreover, if death is meaningless in game (PCs always come back at the same level), then why bother to even keep them alive other than the affinity for the character?  I believe, if there are no consequences for failure, than there is no game.  It is only practice and pretend.#2 Through the natural course of play characters are going to differ in levels.  It's inevitable just as in life.  And corresponding this way to life it becomes more realistic.  Just as having potential Encounters ranging from 1-20 available to the characters at all levels.  In the real world, you can get yourself killed quite easily.  No one is "balancing" encounters for you.  Just as in life, your PCs need to be on the lookout to keep themselves alive.  Our group does require new characters to always start at 1st.  This is considered fair as all character are required to earn their place in the party.  This is pretty tough even for my tastes, but I understand the reasons behind it.  What is often misunderstood though is the fact that all the characters, regardless of level, are equal in terms of playing the game.  Each faces challenges, each receives awards, and are treated equally by the DM.  There is no favoritism.  Players choose as a group how to maximize their group's individual assets.  So even a 1st level rogue is going to see as much play as a 10th level wizard.  It's the earned power that is different.EDIT: I do agree the current system does make it difficult for characters of vastly divergent levels to work together.  A lot of the built in assumptions work against troupe style play and more towards your own.Do you think the barbarian's player might feel his sacrifice was cheapened, if he were awarded experience for the unselfish act?  Or if he was brought back at a higher level than the other players?  It sounds like you have a great player there.  If he knows the consequences of his actions, why would you want to hedge them?  Player expertise is not the same as character level.  Your best player might be playing the lowest level character (1st) and your least experienced player might be playing the highest level character (20th).   The point of experience rewards focusing on player success is so that the least experienced player might have learned something through 20 levels of advancement.  Having to start over after sacrificing your character for the greater good doesn't deny the value of rewarding players.  It validates it.</blockquote>

Verification