That might be an issue with Characters' backstories, not the starting level. To paraphrase Jim Davis of Web DM, he's annoyed by backstories where all the most interesting events and accomplishments and events are built into the Character backstory, and feels that it implies that the Player doesn't trust that the DM will provide an interesting enough story in the Campaign for the in game events to build an interesting Character history upon.
A level 1 Character should probably have a level 1 background story.
I can see creating higher level Characters for short Campaigns, or one shots, or to play through a particular module as a stand alone adventure. However, if it's an extended home brew Campaign, and it probably entails them eventually slaying Dragons, I'd still start them at level 1 ( or 3 ), and work them up. To skip over the initial parts of their "heroes journey" kind of implies that the DM doesn't believe the Players are going to be providing an interesting enough story in the Campaign to keep the DM entertained.
I'm a big believer in "the journey, not the destination". They'd get to the Dragon eventually, and the path there, and the story they create getting there, still has value to me.
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
That might be an issue with Characters' backstories, not the starting level. To paraphrase Jim Davis of Web DM, he's annoyed by backstories where all the most interesting events and accomplishments and events are built into the Character backstory, and feels that it implies that the Player doesn't trust that the DM will provide an interesting enough story in the Campaign for the in game events to build an interesting Character history upon.
A level 1 Character should probably have a level 1 background story.
I can see creating higher level Characters for short Campaigns, or one shots, or to play through a particular module as a stand alone adventure. However, if it's an extended home brew Campaign, and it probably entails them eventually slaying Dragons, I'd still start them at level 1 ( or 3 ), and work them up. To skip over the initial parts of their "heroes journey" kind of implies that the DM doesn't believe the Players are going to be providing an interesting enough story in the Campaign to keep the DM entertained.
I'm a big believer in "the journey, not the destination". They'd get to the Dragon eventually, and the path there, and the story they create getting there, still has value to me.
Absolutely this!
If your backstory is a few hundred year old wizard that has been studying to unlock the secrets to lichdom, he ain’t gonna be level 1 so scrap it. If your fighter is a great warrior that has fought in hundreds of battles and won them all, he ain’t level 1. Scale it back so it’s believable so the Wizard was fascinated by stories of a famous lich and wants to head out into the world to learn more or your soldier was assigned to a unit that didn’t see much combat so your years were rear with the gear mostly which is why he left the military and headed out for adventure on his own.
That might be an issue with Characters' backstories, not the starting level. To paraphrase Jim Davis of Web DM, he's annoyed by backstories where all the most interesting events and accomplishments and events are built into the Character backstory, and feels that it implies that the Player doesn't trust that the DM will provide an interesting enough story in the Campaign for the in game events to build an interesting Character history upon.
A level 1 Character should probably have a level 1 background story.
I can see creating higher level Characters for short Campaigns, or one shots, or to play through a particular module as a stand alone adventure. However, if it's an extended home brew Campaign, and it probably entails them eventually slaying Dragons, I'd still start them at level 1 ( or 3 ), and work them up. To skip over the initial parts of their "heroes journey" kind of implies that the DM doesn't believe the Players are going to be providing an interesting enough story in the Campaign to keep the DM entertained.
I'm a big believer in "the journey, not the destination". They'd get to the Dragon eventually, and the path there, and the story they create getting there, still has value to me.
Absolutely this!
If your backstory is a few hundred year old wizard that has been studying to unlock the secrets to lichdom, he ain’t gonna be level 1 so scrap it. If your fighter is a great warrior that has fought in hundreds of battles and won them all, he ain’t level 1. Scale it back so it’s believable so the Wizard was fascinated by stories of a famous lich and wants to head out into the world to learn more or your soldier was assigned to a unit that didn’t see much combat so your years were rear with the gear mostly which is why he left the military and headed out for adventure on his own.
I agree with this. I have seen a lot of players come up with some crazy stuff. I know I had stated starting at level one in order to let the players work on their backstory. I should of been more clear, or correct with what I was getting at. I personally do not accept any crazy backstories that would clearly suggest that the character is far more experienced then what their level reflects. What I do is in the case of starting at level one is give the players more time to interact with the world and learn about it. Or even befriend some NPCs that may help them later down the road. To be honest I require very little background info on a character and rarely utilize it. I let the players come up with creative ways to use what they know from cleaning animal pens before heading out on an adventure. You know, now that I think about it. This should be a post more about starting at level 1 or starting at level 5. A significant amount can happen between 1 and 5, where 1 and 2 not so much.
Start at Level 1.. actually no, I start players ar level 0. HP 4 + con, no real equipment to speak of. Characters start together needing to survive and earn everything. In current campaign it was session before they got level 1. Happy the managed to find a wonky (-1) crossbow and some rusty swords (-1 damage). How.when they find something they are glad to it, even a normal spear.
Now their back stories are really involved in story. I let everything need earning, no free level up, always some task or mission needed. As a DM I can't see need for high levels. The game works really well under 10th level ( that's my level limit), My last campaign took players a year of weekly play to get to level 6. New campaign maybe slower. Not to slow to level 3, but then slow burn progression.
I also reverted to XP progression, handing out xP every session so they feel there is progression. I use mission based XP. Around 100 XP x level for each, so you get an idea of progress rate.
I think it’s fun to start at level one so that the players can experience a full character development. It can feel overwhelming to start at a higher level because there are lots of features to figure out. However, with more experienced players starting at a higher level might be fun so the players don’t feel weak.
I have plans for my first campaign,but I want some advice on what level to start with? Should I go with the obvious choice of "level ones meet in tavern" or should I do what Matt Mercer did with the mighty nien and start with level two?
Advice is welcome and encouraged
Matt Mercer did not start at level 2, the players all had one off screen session with him the end of which they leveled to level 2.
For me it depends on your players, how experienced are they? Characters are more squishy at level 1 and 2 that is a fact but for beginner players these low leveled are good to get used to the game before they have to make decisions like subclass etc.
I have plans for my first campaign,but I want some advice on what level to start with? Should I go with the obvious choice of "level ones meet in tavern" or should I do what Matt Mercer did with the mighty nien and start with level two?
Did he start at level 2 though?
Yes, that's where the show starts, on episode 1, the day all the characters meet, they are level 2. But very clearly from that episode, there were 3 groups of characters who already knew each other: Nott/Caleb, Molly/Yasha, and Jester/Fjord/Beau. Additionally, in the first scene with Jester, Fjord, and Beau (in the tavern), some townsfolk come in and give them a monetary reward for favors done for the town by that group. And that group also knew a couple of people from what appeared to have been a "previous adventure" they'd had in the town.
Now, maybe they just wrote that stuff out with Matt. But I always had the impression that he had done a private session with each group (kind of like three "session 0s") before the start, to get everything worked out and establish what they knew about each other. They would not have taped this, because the opening episode was, in part, about revealing "who is Sam going to play this season?" and so forth. And that would have been spoilers. And again, maybe they didn't do anything before the started episode 1... but I always had the impression that they'd done a 'level 1' session with Matt in smaller groups, and then he had leveled them to 2, and then they shot the 1st episode.
This is what he did, 3 sessions that took the players in each session from level 1-2 and let them try out their new character (accents, behaviours etc) off screen.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
That might be an issue with Characters' backstories, not the starting level. To paraphrase Jim Davis of Web DM, he's annoyed by backstories where all the most interesting events and accomplishments and events are built into the Character backstory, and feels that it implies that the Player doesn't trust that the DM will provide an interesting enough story in the Campaign for the in game events to build an interesting Character history upon.
A level 1 Character should probably have a level 1 background story.
I can see creating higher level Characters for short Campaigns, or one shots, or to play through a particular module as a stand alone adventure. However, if it's an extended home brew Campaign, and it probably entails them eventually slaying Dragons, I'd still start them at level 1 ( or 3 ), and work them up. To skip over the initial parts of their "heroes journey" kind of implies that the DM doesn't believe the Players are going to be providing an interesting enough story in the Campaign to keep the DM entertained.
I'm a big believer in "the journey, not the destination". They'd get to the Dragon eventually, and the path there, and the story they create getting there, still has value to me.
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
Absolutely this!
If your backstory is a few hundred year old wizard that has been studying to unlock the secrets to lichdom, he ain’t gonna be level 1 so scrap it. If your fighter is a great warrior that has fought in hundreds of battles and won them all, he ain’t level 1. Scale it back so it’s believable so the Wizard was fascinated by stories of a famous lich and wants to head out into the world to learn more or your soldier was assigned to a unit that didn’t see much combat so your years were rear with the gear mostly which is why he left the military and headed out for adventure on his own.
I agree with this. I have seen a lot of players come up with some crazy stuff. I know I had stated starting at level one in order to let the players work on their backstory. I should of been more clear, or correct with what I was getting at. I personally do not accept any crazy backstories that would clearly suggest that the character is far more experienced then what their level reflects. What I do is in the case of starting at level one is give the players more time to interact with the world and learn about it. Or even befriend some NPCs that may help them later down the road. To be honest I require very little background info on a character and rarely utilize it. I let the players come up with creative ways to use what they know from cleaning animal pens before heading out on an adventure. You know, now that I think about it. This should be a post more about starting at level 1 or starting at level 5. A significant amount can happen between 1 and 5, where 1 and 2 not so much.
Im out.
Start at Level 1.. actually no, I start players ar level 0. HP 4 + con, no real equipment to speak of. Characters start together needing to survive and earn everything. In current campaign it was session before they got level 1. Happy the managed to find a wonky (-1) crossbow and some rusty swords (-1 damage). How.when they find something they are glad to it, even a normal spear.
Now their back stories are really involved in story. I let everything need earning, no free level up, always some task or mission needed. As a DM I can't see need for high levels. The game works really well under 10th level ( that's my level limit), My last campaign took players a year of weekly play to get to level 6. New campaign maybe slower. Not to slow to level 3, but then slow burn progression.
I also reverted to XP progression, handing out xP every session so they feel there is progression. I use mission based XP. Around 100 XP x level for each, so you get an idea of progress rate.
I've started campaigns between levels 1-5, and 3 is by far the best. Everybody gets thier subclass features, they won't die in two hits, and so on.
I think it’s fun to start at level one so that the players can experience a full character development. It can feel overwhelming to start at a higher level because there are lots of features to figure out. However, with more experienced players starting at a higher level might be fun so the players don’t feel weak.
Only spilt the party if you see something shiny.
Ariendela Sneakerson, Half-elf Rogue (8); Harmony Wolfsbane, Tiefling Bard (10); Agnomally, Gnomish Sorcerer (3); Breeze, Tabaxi Monk (8); Grace, Dragonborn Barbarian (7); DM, Homebrew- The Sequestered Lands/Underwater Explorers; Candlekeep
Matt Mercer did not start at level 2, the players all had one off screen session with him the end of which they leveled to level 2.
For me it depends on your players, how experienced are they? Characters are more squishy at level 1 and 2 that is a fact but for beginner players these low leveled are good to get used to the game before they have to make decisions like subclass etc.
This is what he did, 3 sessions that took the players in each session from level 1-2 and let them try out their new character (accents, behaviours etc) off screen.