During my first game I played a Barbarian. Had I started out at 3rd level I would have chosen the Berserker no question. However, during that first session I had an encounter with some wildlife and I figured it would be really interesting to be able to talk with animals. And thus I changed my mind and took the Totem Path. It's very interesting to me that some DMs were arguing at a brand new player with no tabletop RPG experience would want to play a specific advanced class and that "it would make no sense" to have an Eldritch Knight character with no magical ability at level one. My question would be to wonder how a brand new player would even know what an Eldritch Knight was or how that Martial Archetype mechanically worked. I have never met a brand new player that had memorized the PH. Apparently there are some out there.
Having a 2 hour session for new players to understand the core concepts of a tabletop RPG as well as the simply mechanics is very important in my opinion. There are are many different ways DMs accomplish this. What are some of your methods?
The 2 hour session for new players describing the classes and asking questions to figure out a good fit are way more important. Plenty of classes are making decisions at creation, whether it is the Paths of Sorcerers, Warlocks or Clerics, or similar features such as the Ranger's Favored Enemy or Fighter's Combat Style, but even when assigning ability scores a player is probably already needing to know if they are going to be Strength or Dexterity based, or if they need another ability such as Intelligence for Eldritch Knight.
Not only that, but having that character defining moment, such as encountering wild life, is just as likely to happen after even 3rd level and something players will always be running into. If these are new players, just let them have the flexibility to change their characters around for a bit. Problems solved.
I'd suggest to start at level 1. Then if the players are gaining confidence quickly, use a milestone xp bonus (usually at the end of a chapter or session), and go to level 3 - 5.
This, more or less. I just started running a game with total newbies. Started them at Level 1 and got them to 3 by the end of the first session. It was a nice way to start, get everyone used to leveling up and such.
Ask the group.. Anyone want to be a spell caster? Yes? Level 1..
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Life before death. Strength before weakness. Journey before destination. I will protect those who cannot protect themselves, I will protect even those I hate so long as it is right.
Levels 1-2 should not be 'a slog' -- they go past blazingly fast thanks to the XP curve.
The exception is if you're running the Tiamat adventure path, where level 1 is a slog just because the characters are never allowed a long rest. Not sure who thought that was a good idea.
I kinda have anxiety going to my D&D game at a local shop. We all started at level 2. The DM felt that there was a lot of 'hack and slash' starting at level 1. I can understand, now , his challenge to try and introduce a new player to the game & keep a veteran group of seasoned players interested. TBH, we are now at level 3 and I'm not even sure how that affects the character I've created. I don't have the mechanics down.
If a person is not new to the game but is starting off a new character, starting level is up to the DM. I personally feel that when starting a new character, you should always start off at level1. This way you can develop the nuances a character gets by not "short cutting" levels. I know running dungeons over and over gain is a bit monotonous, but if you have a DM that believes in true random encounters with random gained treasures, it can be fun because it will literally be a roll of the dice to determine the fate of your development. Every time you do the dungeon, it will be different. Once down the hall, an ogre encounter. Next time, a trap. next time a treasure. Of course, the DMs I used to game with spent the time and built home-brewed adventures. We had a blast.
It is really in the players' favor to start them at level 1. The experience point progression to level 3 will not take long and the the players should not be deprived of the first two levels, especially if they are new to the game.
If the DM feels that his or her prepared scenario is too difficult, the DM can create a quick introductory scenario for them that will take them to 3rd level.
For your first time playing, play at 1st level. if you work with XP, those first 2 levels fly by quickly anyway. if you're doing "milestone level rewards", plan around leveling your players up after the first and again on the second session/third session. after that, proceed as you do normally. As both player and GM, I don't like lingering in levels 1-4 too much either, but sometimes there's a need for it.
What I've been doing with my players so far, is that their first game started at 1st level. they made it all the way to.... I think 4th level, 5th, before we stopped? the second game started at 3rd level. they just got to level 6 when we called it quits. my next game will start at either 5th or I might skip to 7th level, and I intend to plan it better so we don't end it prematurely.
Now, I run these short-term games once a year or so, which isn't really a good habit when you're trying to get your players used to a "new system" (for them, as they always play Pathfinder), but your investment need not be so long term to gradually get your players into the game. :)
I'm not - nor was I ever - your "obstacle" until you've deemed me as such, nor am I your wallet, my hard earnt money is not yours by deault.
Je suis Consumer - We are the foundation, the floor beneath your rug. our support is the fate of every retail product, business, and franchise. for success you need support.
I will always miss what you were, but I will never miss what you've become.
For new players, definitely go with level 1. Even after having played every edition since BECMI, I'm glad we started at 1st for our first campaign.
For our second campaign in 5E, we started at 3rd level. That's when many characters "mature" into their subclasses, etc. It's good for starting with "competent" PCs. Now, if you want to play the farm boy, urchin sneak, green city watch, etc. then 1st is still a great place to start. Honestly, I really like the way 5E did the whole "3rd is the new 1st" thing, even though I was skeptical when I first heard that phrase.
Would say start with level one, they will level fast enough after a few encounters. But be carefull lvl 1 are squichy. So be creative if it looks like you will accidently kill one.
Happened to me, hordes of kobolds .. no problem...... 1 pack of rats and down the paladin went.
Players do die too easy at level one. Your average player who doesn't have a good con can die to any basic weapon in the game in one round. And the rules seem to indicate this would be instadeath as the total damage taken exceeds his max hit points. So without fudging dice rolls, or making sure the monsters only have a d4 available to attack with...well PCs are squishy.
So I would say to some degree level 3 is easier to play than level 1 because you can have more challenging encounters and its less forgiving as you are getting use to the game.
Not only do I start new players at lvl 1. I usually only let them pick there race and fill in some of the "about me" stuff. Gets the game going a lot quicker. The rest I just work into the story. You awaken to the sound of horse hooves and clattering armor. A brief pause and the slamming open of the door. Soldiers storm in and declare " Congratulations, you've bean chosen to fight in her majesties army,( discuss classes with players) Ranger division!!" You are dragged out to a large carriage bye your scruff and shackled in the back along side several other recruits. The last bits of hope leave when you hear the screams of your parents still inside the cottage.
Three days travel, and you've arrived at the training camps." Here you will receive the training needed to got out and die in service of the Queen." (help player chose abilities) a soldier belts out while slapping a handful of sub-par gear into your chest. (help player pick equipment).Blah Blah Blah on and on.
We are still pretty new at 5E, having played 1E forever, but in our experience, 1st level characters are the way to go. They are significantly tough enough to handle just about anything a published adventure has to throw at them.
Start at level 1. The problems you described are DM problems, not character problems.
Agreed - the ease of character death, or not, is entirely in the hands of the DM and the challenges posed to the party.
It is really weird that so many people responded to this on Facebook and reddit by saying "Players die too easily at level one". As if there is no possibly way to avoid that. DMs have the tools to easily control that aspect of the game by planning out combat a bit. It makes me wonder how many people are running D&D sessions as dice rolling games. The mechanics for rewarding creative combat are right in the rulebook.
The rules, as presented in the PHB and MM result in unbelievably squishy 1st level characters. The presumption that new players and new DMs should somehow 'know better' than to run the game according to those rules is, frankly, obtuse.
In fact, the regularity with which parties are wiped by the goblin cave in the Beginner Box, an adventure written by professional designers who are intimately familiar with the system and in question, speaks quite loudly to the fallacy of that presumption.
Starting level should be dictated by the DM, with an eye toward the experience level of his players. The newer the player, the better served they are by starting at 1st level, so that they can grasp the rules and grow into options as they are presented without feeling overwhelmed right away.
Starting HP, on the other hand, are grossly inadequate, unless you *want* to run a campaign where the initial batch of characters are unlikely to survive normal-difficulty encounters long enough to reach 2nd level (much less 3rd), or where you, as the DM *have* to openly fudge die rolls to prevent a single lucky shot from taking out any single character in the party.
Thats why I, an experienced DM, give starting characters extra HP. Not so many that players can afford to make multiple stupid decisions, but enough to reducing the likelihood of an unlucky die roll from ending a character in one shot. General, I go with either HD+Con (not Con Modifier) or HD + 1/2Con (again, not Con Modifier). (The latter ends up being a flat 5HP bonus.)
I'm growing into the mindset that starting at third level is probably the best bet for most games of experienced players. At that point, all the PCs will have picked up their sub-class and have all their baseline abilities, etc. They've just hit the first point of truly being competent. It's the sweet spot where you're weak enough to say that you've just got natural talent and/or good training, but powerful enough to say that your character has seen some actual action, if you want.
For those who want the feel of being totally green "peasant heroes" or something similar, starting at first level works well. I really feel like first and second level in 5E fill the niche that the various "0 level" rules have tried for, over the editions.
If you're talking about new players, even experienced but new to 5E, I think there's value in starting at first level. Get used to the system, keep the fiddly bits minimized, etc. The first couple levels go pretty quickly. You shouldn't hardly even be able to make it to a dungeon before hitting second level. It goes quickly and gets you used to advancement mechanics.
IMO, the worst option is to start at first level with arbitrary higher hit points. I've seen recommendations around starting with Con, starting with a flat 20 (or 30) hit points, or a variety of other odd ideas. Personally, I'd say either start at 1st level or don't. If you do, then don't bastardize it. If you want more hit points, then start at 3rd level. The first couple levels go quickly enough that you aren't really missing anything. If you have a reason to start with lower powered PCs, but want higher survivability, then a reasonable compromise is to start at 1st level with 3rd level hit points -- but you don't gain any more until 4th level. Again, I'd probably just go with 3rd level PCs, but there are reasons to do otherwise. Just don't over complicate it.
I find that the hardest thing for new players isn't play so much as wrapping their heads around the basic mechanics. Whether it be how profeciency bonus' work how many spells they have or how inflation works. Personally I'd find it easier to start at level 1 to make sure they understand then accelerate to whatever level you want them to play at.
But if you're confident in your party, go ahead and chose whatever you want.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dubito, ergo cogito, ergo sum.
PbP character Son Kol - Kel Dor Fringer (Shadows of the Republic)
In fact, the regularity with which parties are wiped by the goblin cave in the Beginner Box, an adventure written by professional designers who are intimately familiar with the system and in question, speaks quite loudly to the fallacy of that presumption.
Or rather, speaks quite loudly that the designers wanted to bring back the fun of classic DnD.
Here, Here!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Ask the group.. Anyone want to be a spell caster? Yes? Level 1..
Life before death. Strength before weakness. Journey before destination. I will protect those who cannot protect themselves, I will protect even those I hate so long as it is right.
Levels 1-2 should not be 'a slog' -- they go past blazingly fast thanks to the XP curve.
The exception is if you're running the Tiamat adventure path, where level 1 is a slog just because the characters are never allowed a long rest. Not sure who thought that was a good idea.
I kinda have anxiety going to my D&D game at a local shop. We all started at level 2. The DM felt that there was a lot of 'hack and slash' starting at level 1. I can understand, now , his challenge to try and introduce a new player to the game & keep a veteran group of seasoned players interested. TBH, we are now at level 3 and I'm not even sure how that affects the character I've created. I don't have the mechanics down.
Utter, total noob. Easily dicetimadated...
If a person is not new to the game but is starting off a new character, starting level is up to the DM. I personally feel that when starting a new character, you should always start off at level1. This way you can develop the nuances a character gets by not "short cutting" levels. I know running dungeons over and over gain is a bit monotonous, but if you have a DM that believes in true random encounters with random gained treasures, it can be fun because it will literally be a roll of the dice to determine the fate of your development. Every time you do the dungeon, it will be different. Once down the hall, an ogre encounter. Next time, a trap. next time a treasure. Of course, the DMs I used to game with spent the time and built home-brewed adventures. We had a blast.
It is really in the players' favor to start them at level 1. The experience point progression to level 3 will not take long and the the players should not be deprived of the first two levels, especially if they are new to the game.
If the DM feels that his or her prepared scenario is too difficult, the DM can create a quick introductory scenario for them that will take them to 3rd level.
For your first time playing, play at 1st level. if you work with XP, those first 2 levels fly by quickly anyway. if you're doing "milestone level rewards", plan around leveling your players up after the first and again on the second session/third session. after that, proceed as you do normally. As both player and GM, I don't like lingering in levels 1-4 too much either, but sometimes there's a need for it.
What I've been doing with my players so far, is that their first game started at 1st level. they made it all the way to.... I think 4th level, 5th, before we stopped? the second game started at 3rd level. they just got to level 6 when we called it quits. my next game will start at either 5th or I might skip to 7th level, and I intend to plan it better so we don't end it prematurely.
Now, I run these short-term games once a year or so, which isn't really a good habit when you're trying to get your players used to a "new system" (for them, as they always play Pathfinder), but your investment need not be so long term to gradually get your players into the game. :)
I'm not - nor was I ever - your "obstacle" until you've deemed me as such, nor am I your wallet, my hard earnt money is not yours by deault.
Je suis Consumer - We are the foundation, the floor beneath your rug. our support is the fate of every retail product, business, and franchise. for success you need support.
I will always miss what you were, but I will never miss what you've become.
#OpenDnD #CanceltheSub #DnDBegone.#NeverForgive #NeverForget
Start them off at level one so they get a feel for the mechanics without having to worry about all the aspects of leveling just yet.
For new players, definitely go with level 1. Even after having played every edition since BECMI, I'm glad we started at 1st for our first campaign.
For our second campaign in 5E, we started at 3rd level. That's when many characters "mature" into their subclasses, etc. It's good for starting with "competent" PCs. Now, if you want to play the farm boy, urchin sneak, green city watch, etc. then 1st is still a great place to start. Honestly, I really like the way 5E did the whole "3rd is the new 1st" thing, even though I was skeptical when I first heard that phrase.
Would say start with level one, they will level fast enough after a few encounters. But be carefull lvl 1 are squichy. So be creative if it looks like you will accidently kill one.
Happened to me, hordes of kobolds .. no problem...... 1 pack of rats and down the paladin went.
Players do die too easy at level one. Your average player who doesn't have a good con can die to any basic weapon in the game in one round. And the rules seem to indicate this would be instadeath as the total damage taken exceeds his max hit points. So without fudging dice rolls, or making sure the monsters only have a d4 available to attack with...well PCs are squishy.
So I would say to some degree level 3 is easier to play than level 1 because you can have more challenging encounters and its less forgiving as you are getting use to the game.
Not only do I start new players at lvl 1. I usually only let them pick there race and fill in some of the "about me" stuff. Gets the game going a lot quicker. The rest I just work into the story. You awaken to the sound of horse hooves and clattering armor. A brief pause and the slamming open of the door. Soldiers storm in and declare " Congratulations, you've bean chosen to fight in her majesties army,( discuss classes with players) Ranger division!!" You are dragged out to a large carriage bye your scruff and shackled in the back along side several other recruits. The last bits of hope leave when you hear the screams of your parents still inside the cottage.
Three days travel, and you've arrived at the training camps." Here you will receive the training needed to got out and die in service of the Queen." (help player chose abilities) a soldier belts out while slapping a handful of sub-par gear into your chest. (help player pick equipment).Blah Blah Blah on and on.
We are still pretty new at 5E, having played 1E forever, but in our experience, 1st level characters are the way to go. They are significantly tough enough to handle just about anything a published adventure has to throw at them.
I think it depends on your goals.
I'm growing into the mindset that starting at third level is probably the best bet for most games of experienced players. At that point, all the PCs will have picked up their sub-class and have all their baseline abilities, etc. They've just hit the first point of truly being competent. It's the sweet spot where you're weak enough to say that you've just got natural talent and/or good training, but powerful enough to say that your character has seen some actual action, if you want.
For those who want the feel of being totally green "peasant heroes" or something similar, starting at first level works well. I really feel like first and second level in 5E fill the niche that the various "0 level" rules have tried for, over the editions.
If you're talking about new players, even experienced but new to 5E, I think there's value in starting at first level. Get used to the system, keep the fiddly bits minimized, etc. The first couple levels go pretty quickly. You shouldn't hardly even be able to make it to a dungeon before hitting second level. It goes quickly and gets you used to advancement mechanics.
IMO, the worst option is to start at first level with arbitrary higher hit points. I've seen recommendations around starting with Con, starting with a flat 20 (or 30) hit points, or a variety of other odd ideas. Personally, I'd say either start at 1st level or don't. If you do, then don't bastardize it. If you want more hit points, then start at 3rd level. The first couple levels go quickly enough that you aren't really missing anything. If you have a reason to start with lower powered PCs, but want higher survivability, then a reasonable compromise is to start at 1st level with 3rd level hit points -- but you don't gain any more until 4th level. Again, I'd probably just go with 3rd level PCs, but there are reasons to do otherwise. Just don't over complicate it.
I find that the hardest thing for new players isn't play so much as wrapping their heads around the basic mechanics. Whether it be how profeciency bonus' work how many spells they have or how inflation works. Personally I'd find it easier to start at level 1 to make sure they understand then accelerate to whatever level you want them to play at.
But if you're confident in your party, go ahead and chose whatever you want.
Dubito, ergo cogito, ergo sum.
PbP character Son Kol - Kel Dor Fringer (Shadows of the Republic)
PbP charcater Mabeh Honeydew - Wood Elf Druid (Void Beyond the Stars - Inner Realms)