Back to Basics
Wait a minute… I thought that Demon Queen still had her demon powers, just in Magus’s body. How else did she make her eyes glow that one time? Was that just her invoking the real Magus’s thaumaturgy? But hang on… That’s a 5e spell! Magus isn’t even a class in 5e! And why would Demon Queen know how to cast it if she did have access? Most of a demon’s powers are innate spellcasting, and I seriously doubt a displaced demon lord would have studied the intricacies of spell combat. Even more concerning, if Bad Cat lacks access to her powers, does that mean Her Majesty, Queen Scratchypaws of the Demon Web Pits now possess the awful might of a near-deity? CLEAN UP YOUR CONTINUITY, HANDBOOK!
Anywhoodles, while Team Bounty Hunter deal with their gug struggles, let’s take a moment to empathize with Bad Cat’s plight. This is a feeling I know well. I may have my issues with late-game rocket tag, but starting over at level 1 after wielding the cosmic might of level 20 can be a drag. Suddenly the thousand and one options of a full-power PC are reduced to “attack once and move.” You can also yawn as a bonus action.
The common wisdom here is to start your campaigns at low (but not too low) level. In 5e D&D for example, that might place PCs at 3rd level where their archetypes kick in. The difference between a swashbuckler and a thief rogue tends to be more mechanically dynamic than “1st level rogue with rapier” and “1st level rogue with bag of ball bearings.” Still, any bit of additional complexity can be taxing when you’re teaching new players. “Wait, which one do I roll again?” is usually enough of a learning curve on its own.
I’m actually coming up against this issue myself this summer, having been asked to run for a group of newbies here in Berlin. Would you give ’em the full-on 1st level experience as a way to ease into the game? Or would you start ’em at a slightly higher level for that more engaging mechanical experience? I’d honestly love some opinions on this one, as this whole oops-I’m-GMing-5e issue is kicking off within the week!
ADD SOME NSFW TO YOUR FANTASY! If you’ve ever been curious about that Handbook of Erotic Fantasy banner down at the bottom of the page, then you should check out the “Quest Giver” reward level over on The Handbook of Heroes Patreon. Thrice a month you’ll get to see what the Handbook cast get up to when the lights go out. Adults only, 18+ years of age, etc. etc.
I’ve never played 5e, but I generally lile to start players off at level 2. Still newbies, but they’re a little tougher than at level 1 and can justify having some experience in their backstory.
I hope you’ll have fun with the game!
As for Queen Scratchypaws having DQ’s powers: the SLAs may be innate, but she hasn’t had a lot of time to get acquainted with them and can’t exactly ask the other fiends for pointers without outing herself.
Bad Cat might be in a better position; Inquisitor is big on training, so she’d approve if Bad Cat did.
I tend to chalk Bad Cat’s “thaumaturgy” up to the Unkicked One sensing her true nature, rather than actual visual effects.
We view that comic through Patches’s eyes? I dunno… Shouldn’t it have been in black and white then? Dogs and whatnot.
Dogs actually can see some colours, and Antipaladin swears his pup is a hellhound…
Besides, wouldn’t that add to the horror and alien presence of DQ, if her very presence rewired poor Patches’ sensory capacity?
Our sensorium is dog Mythos. Neat.
I’m personally a big fan of starting with level-0 characters like the Survivors in Van Richten’s Guide to Ravenloft, because for me it makes the learning curve of 5e that much easier.
Level 0: How do dice work, how is an attack made, what’s the world like?
Level 1: How do my very basic class features function?
Level 2: As above, plus how do I level up my character?
Level 3: Add an additional level of complexity to come to grips with.
Level 4: Add a fairly flat improvement that allows the less-confident player time to continue dealing with the former whilst still allowing the more-confident one to continue to mechanically diversify via feats.
Level 5: The character comes into their own as a fully-functioning, mechanically powerful adventurer who has earned not only in-world power but out-of-world system mastery.
It’s a wonderful thing to see new players develop through this process, and I honestly think it’s robbing them of an important experience if the DM doesn’t start their first game at, at most, level 1.
Are there any published adventures for 0-level PCs? Reading through that section it looks they’re intended as temporary characters for flashbacks and dramatic dream sequences and such.
Nice reference to the early days of OOTS, there. 😉
I am a man of culture. Super geeky culture, but culture nonetheless.
I feel vulnerable at the lvl1 start mostly – it’s easy to die to bad luck (crits), lack of resources, lack of options. And you generally don’t have your basic abilities till 3rd. It can be disheartening to craft a fine adventurer whos story might be cut short by a single greataxe crit.
I think the low-level options are better for quick-start gaming.
“I just wanna play. Do I really have to do all this homework first?”
That’s what you have the pregens for. Best way to introduce people anyway – the first time they play they might have a better time having a character that might not be overoptimised and 100% personalised, but doesn’t have any gaping flaws or “one trick pony” gimmicks either.
You keep mentioning this ‘Demon Queen’ in the comments? Who’s that? Is that a relative of Bad Cat?
Also, ‘spiked tentacles of forced intrusion’ sounds like a cool band name. And a plot point for the other handbook.
> You keep mentioning this ‘Demon Queen’ in the comments? Who’s that? Is that a relative of Bad Cat?
https://i.imgur.com/jbsNRYt.png
“Spiked tentacles of forced intrusion” is an Order of the Stick reference… and an illustration of why you don’t pick a fight with a wizard first thing in the morning.
…And certainly not without some salve of slipperiness handy.
I’m now imagining that Her Majesty, Queen Scratchypaws of the Demon Web Pits does have all-mighty Wish magic… But she’s unaware that it’s of the Treacherous Wishcraft type (like how Glabrezu do), and won’t go well no matter how well she or the Wish-grantee words it.
Which leads to problems as she attempts to wish Woolantula to have a raise/promotion for good service. Or offers them wishes, putting them in a position of ‘can’t accept, can’t refuse’.
unhappyKittyFace.exe
Personally, I feel it’s a good idea to start at level 1, but advance through the early levels quickly. This lets them ease into the game and figure out their characters one level at a time rather than all at once (picking several levels’ worth of features at a time is a pain for high-complexity classes like spellcasters), but also ensures they get to the fun parts of their class as soon as possible once they’ve worked out the basics. Even in systems with which I’m experienced, making a new high-level character typically has an awkward adjustment period for me, whereas playing a more advanced version of a character I’ve had at lower levels goes pretty smoothly since I know their usual tricks.
> making a new high-level character typically has an awkward adjustment period for me
One of my first 3.5 games was epic level. I did not stick with that game.
That’s part of my hesitancy here.
if you were doing a one-shot with pre-gens I’d go with a slightly higher level, with a handy cheat sheet, that’s what my friend has run at events where for some of the party it might be their first encounter with tabletop RPGs, else I guess it depends how newby these players are, on one hand, 5e is really simple mechanically, and you could really do with more to do on your turn, on the other starting squishy and getting mauled by oversized rodents is part of the experience, and my opinion of the simplicity of 5e might be effected by the fact I started with 3.5
> my opinion of the simplicity of 5e might be effected by the fact I started with 3.5
Ditto. Honestly, it took me about a year to overcome the learning curve and begin finding fun in the mechanical part of the game. Once I got over that hump though, I absolutely fell in love.
I find 3rd level is a good place to start for parties who have been around the block a bit. For those getting their feet wet for the first time, I still prefer using 2nd level characters, if only so they have a bit of a hit point cushion. I don’t try to kill characters for making an obvious mistake, but I can only justify so many near-misses. And spellcasters are fragile enough as it is.
Don’t death saving throws kind of sort of provide a buffer against low-level insta-death?
Not against actual insta-death. There’s a rule in 5e that you instantly die if you take damage equal to your current HP plus your full HP, which…obviously comes up a lot at 1st level. A wizard with 2/7 HP getting hit with a greataxe could end up just dying, do not pass death saves, do not collect 200 GP.
(The simplest solution is, of course, to ignore that rule.)
My groups are all pretty experienced. When I run I prefer starting at level 3. Still on the lower end of the power curve, but enough room to get your level dips out of the way and everyone has at least 2 feats.
Pathfinder 1e? If so, then I hear ya. We spent months IRL on Level 1 of our megadungeon, and our poor paladin was like a Bozo Bop Bag falling over and getting up again.
Way I see it : if you have players that never played from level 1 to 3 before, start at level 1. Otherwise, start at level 3.
And if you have a mix of both, start at level 1 and level up quickly, with the mutual understanding that the newbies can rely on the veterans.
Really, level 1 is… not good. Beyond the lack of options you mentionned, there’s also the issue that level1 is super lethal (level 2 as well, though not quite *as* bad). Not only are you one good crit away from being downed even if you’re a full health martial (including a barbarian who hasn’t had time to rage yet), but your allies have very few options to bring you back ; if your cleric casts healing word, well there goes *half of his ressources* for the day. And if he can’t or won’t, well, you get to sit on your hands and roll death saves.
So while I do believe starting from the beginning is important for people who aren’t comfortable with the game yet, so as to not overwhelm them, I also think it’s one of the weakest point of the edition and its best to get it over with as fast as possible – and if you don’t *have* to deal with it, then don’t and just start at level 3.
> Way I see it : if you have players that never played from level 1 to 3 before, start at level 1. Otherwise, start at level 3.
That is a really concise and handy algorithm. Cheers!
With 5e in particular, I’d generally start at lvl 3. I’m in agreement on the whole ‘not very interesting till the archetype kicks in’ sentiment. In 5e, you really have few choices to make about your character before that.
It ultimately comes down to the plot of the campaign, though. How new are the characters supposed to be at this show? I once started a pathfinder group off with npc classes only.
I’ve always liked the idea of the 0th level character funnel from OSR games, but I’ve never seen one implemented in 5e. Not a good idea for new players, but something I might try out next time I’m introducing semi-experienced folk.
When starting a game at level 1, I like to implement a Beginner’s Luck bonus. Everyone starts the game with 10 temporary hit points. These don’t expire, but once they’re gone, they’re gone forever. This provides the simplicity and learning curve of level 1, but mitigates the risk and squishiness of level 1.
I guess that’ll get you through the first fight anyway.
I have not yet been won over by 5e. That said, it’s not my least favorite edition. (I’ve at least played it a little bit. Looking at you, 4e.)
In terms of starting folks out, even our power-gamers enjoyed a run wherein one of our GMs began his homebrew campaign with us as 0-level commoners whose choices during session 1 determined what Level-1 class we would be during session 2 and beyond. My baker’s daughter-turned Cleric began with a kitchen knife, a rolling pin club, and a pot-lid buckler. Post religious experience, she crafted her first holy symbol from salt-dough (ceramic). The first mission was a lot of RP and travel, with only one combat (vs. 1-HD bandits). By the end, we had acquired the usual values of starting equipment and real (vs. improvised) weapons.
PROS: The tutorial was built-in, and we all had customized level-1 heroes (with 3 bonus ranks in a Profession, Craft, Perform, or Knowledge) by session 2, all without sacrificing any of the overall narrative.
CONS: We were level 1. One bad round and a rat could have killed one of us.
For a group of mixed experience, creating a character at 3rd or 4th level can be time consuming and daunting but ultimately creates a more satisfying (and less squishy) PC than a level 1 (“I have one spell”) character. More than once I’ve run a 1-shot evening for strangers with 4th-level pregens (goofy but effective characters with memorable names) that worked great, with everyone (veterans and noobs alike) jumping right in and managing the spells, feats, and powersets without too much difficulty.
PROS: I think the 4-HD option works great for playing, more options and hp (and so some wiggle room for non-fatal player errors) without overwhelming a new player with 1 million buttons to push.
CONS: As a classroom teacher, I shudder to think of the time-sink and handholding required to make all those characters from scratch in-session while explaining what all the options are, what we’re doing to the characters now, and why. It’s why I made pregens for the drop-in games.
> I have not yet been won over by 5e.
It’s an excellent system for new players getting into roleplaying. Not least because it’s a lingua franca for the hobby, meaning it will give ’em their best shot at finding a group and continuing RPGs on their own.
Personally i’d start them at one but go to lvl3 at a faster pace. just milestone them up through a level when you see they got their shit together with what they got right now
One level per session type stuff? I could see that working, yeah.
> That’s a 5e spell! Magus isn’t even a class in 5e!
It’s called Eldritch Knight Fighter. Some archetypes are bigger than any one system.
Eh…I mean, yes and no. Yes in that they both combine magic and melee combat; no in the admixture. I’d say the Magus is closer to a bladesinger or a hexblade, purely on the ratio of spell:sword.
War Magic is basically Spell Combat using 5e dual-wielding rules, but Spell Combat isn’t the iconic Magus feature—it’s Spellstrike, and no 5e archetype really has anything equivalent. Arguably Booming/Green Flame Blade fill that thematic niche, but a bladesinger can pick those up as easily as an eldritch knight (and probably get more out of them). And then there’s Magus Arcana, which…5e isn’t anywhere near as modular as Pathfinder, I don’t like that, let’s move on.
Yeah, they’re both gishes, but Pathfinder has plenty of other gish options that aren’t the Magus. For instance, plenty of classes have archetypes that make them good gishes. Heck, the bard of all classes has two—the Arcane Duelist and Dawnflower Dervish. Plenty of divine or psychic classes, like inquisitors and soulknives, also qualify.
Oh, yeah, and then there’s Pathfinder’s Eldritch Knight class, which (mechanical details aside) is basically the same as 5e’s Eldritch Knight, since they’re both inspired by (and trying to improve) the same 3.5 prestige class. I’d say that Eldritch Knight is 5e’s Eldritch Knight more than it’s 5e’s Magus.
So yeah, Eldritch Knight != Magus, any more than Eldritch Knight == Scarred Witch Doctor. Also, PF1 has loads of content.
> I **Wish** for your death!
Fun fact: The description explicitly calls out that example when explaining how to DM it properly: As a monkey’s paw. Wishing someone dead transports you forward in time to after they died by other means. You’d think beings of phenomenal cosmic power would know better than to try to accomplish something with a spell designed to backfire.
1. You’re referencing one spell description in one edition.
2. Even in that edition, “The DM has great latitude in ruling what occurs.”
Bit of advice: Encourage everyone to keep their dice with their highest-numbered side up. It’s a bit of superstition I picked up from some long-time gaming buddies (gotta teach the dice which side you want up, don’cha know), but it helps new players remember/figure out which die is which. The d8 is the one with an 8 on top, the d20 is the one with a 20 on top, the d6 is the normal one, etc.
Nice! I’d heard the superstition, but I hadn’t considered its practical applications.
Also, keeping the dice max-up means over time gravity pulls on the opposite side, thereby making the dice bottom-heavy and increasing the chance of rolling high. Basic physics!
Due to starting up a 5e game at my local game store just so i could have a game to play, my table ended up splitting several times due to the store owner telling people to join. I only got slightly salty about the fact that the entire game was started so i could play and after the first split I was ropes into dming, but more relevantly we ended up with tons of new players. Personally i enjoy teaching dnd to people, im in school to be a teacher after all. However i hate level 1 with a passion. One wrong crit from anything can kill even the tankiest of newbies and a lot of character builds are just plain off and weird at level one, bladesinger wizard is the biggest example of this in my opinion but there are others too. In general I try to start at level three so everyone has a subclass, but we also run mostly book adventures in my group so sometimes that either meabs skipping the introductory adventure or going through it at slightly higher level. The only mostly positive experience ive had in 5e at level 1 was actually the Strixhaven pregen book, the encounters are small and almost garunteed once a day and the book has safeguards built in against actual character death since its a bunch of college students on a campus.
Got a link to that Strixhaven pregen book? I’m not sure which product you’re referencing, and I’m keen to find options beyond Phandelver.
Strixhaven curriculum of chaos
https://www.dndbeyond.com/marketplace/sourcebooks/strixhaven-a-curriculum-of-chaos?gclid=CjwKCAjw4ayUBhA4EiwATWyBrkpkn_i4mtbd3Rftt9ExQS-WGlxoHEYyERV21vmi3LyoYF3OoCXIfxoCnEEQAvD_BwE
In 5e I generally prefer to introduce new players to the game at level 3. At least if I use a bunch of pre-made characters. It is at that point classes become actually interesting, and they have a greater variety of options while still being pretty simple. If they decide they like the game, then we can either start longer campaign from level 1 with characters they themselves make, or they can modify the pre-mades to better fit their taste.
If I am introducing people to the game and they want to create their own characters, often if we start with a longer campaign, then I usually start them out at level 1 or 2. To ease them into the game.
Sounds like I need some Session Zero to sort this.
I’m leaning towards “start at one but level once per session until 3rd.”
That works as well. Have done something along those lines and it worked out fine. It is a good way to ease them into it.
I mainly introduce new players through one-shots, and I find that level 3 characters in 5e are just overall more fun then level 1s. They have more abilities and they don´t die as easily, allowing me to use more interesting enemies and encounters. While still being pretty simple to play.
But it does also depend on who I am going to be playing with. If they are someone who haven´t played D&D, but have played computer RPGs and so on, then I am more likely to start them out at a higher level then someone who is a total newbie at the whole thing.
The worst I have dealt with is a friend in one of my current campaigns, who joined when the rest of the party were at level 13/14. He is a pretty smart guy, who has a bit of experience with the Warhammer RPG and computer games, but it was still a lot to get suddenly thrust into. But to his credit he not only managed but is currently one of the most rulessawy people in the group.
How newbie are we talking here? If they’ve played other RPGs, starting later is probably fine. Giving them mid level characters is also probably fine if they’re pregens you cooked up for them. Otherwise:
In 5th Edition… I’d say definitely start them at level 1 or 2. Spell selection is way too many decisions otherwise.
But maybe even more important, this way they get to have a little experience with the characters and the mechanics before deciding on what subclass they want to pursue. It’s a lot easier to say “Yes, I’d like to focus on [thieving/protecting/divination/etc.]” once you’ve actually seen how those work in the game, and whether they seem fun.
> It’s a lot easier to say “Yes, I’d like to focus on [thieving/protecting/divination/etc.]” once you’ve actually seen how those work in the game, and whether they seem fun.
I wonder if “start with pregens, but at level 3 you can rebuild for free” would be a good idea….
See? Told you Colin reads The Order of The Stick 😀
Also didn’t knew you were at Germany 🙂
Enjoy Berlin 😀
> See? Told you Colin reads The Order of The Stick
I’d been called out. I had to respond!
> Enjoy Berlin
Cheers! Really cool town so far. Found some “talking statues” the other day for a free walking tour: http://www.talking-statues-berlin.de/en/
“Most of a demon’s powers are innate spellcasting, and I seriously doubt a displaced demon lord would have studied the intricacies of spell combat.” I mean… its not like Magus ever studied that, so who would tell the difference?
That’s a good point actually. We’ve joked a couple of times down in the comments that she took an archetype:
https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/magus/archetypes/paizo-magus-archetypes/eldritch-scion/
For groups of total newbies, I like to start at level 1, but advance pretty quickly. Level 1 is a good ‘training wheels’ scenario, cause most classes do only have ‘hit thing with other thing’, and casters aren’t drowning in spells. But once they’ve cut their teeth on some basic combat, getting them to the more exciting (and complicated) shenaniganery that goes on once you have an archetype is how I set the hook, as it were.
Do you like to level up once/session for 1 and 2?
This comment actually brings to light something I really enjoy about Pathfinder 2e. Even at level one you can still feel strong relative to the creatures you fight. You’re still gonna be squishy and a Goblin crit can down a caster, but even when you’re throwing out low-level spells or swinging with your vanilla longsword, you can still feel strong.
I think this comes from two sources with synergy; action economy and proficiency scaling. Having three actions to use to move, attack, make a skill check, use a feat, cast a spell, and so forth allow you a lot of room to maneuver and do things even at the very beginning. You can get in position to flank, raise a shield for the AC bonus, then try and shove to reposition the enemy closer to your fellow martials. Which segues into scaling proficiency; as long as you level up the stuff you want to be good at, you will always be at least good at it relative to your level. Even at level 1 if you’re trained in athletics you can grapple, shove, trip, or disarm. Trained in intimidation and you can scare the piss out of them to reduce their saves, AC, and to-hit. Trained in deception and you can still feint, catching them flat-footed to your next attack.
As I type this out I realize I’m talking more about a game that has a generally solid design, having so many skills being useful at all levels against enemies that are appropriately balanced. But my point remains that in PF2e even though you do feel it when you’re starting off fresh at level 1, it’s less “oh god I’m weak and useless until X level” and more “I have to wait to get my goodies at X, Y, and Z levels”. It also probably helps that since proficiencies are tied to your level, you’re less reliant on loot to feel like a badass. Oh you’re a level 3 Fighter with a +4 weapon? Congrats this level 8 NPC still wallops your backside like an angry Mexican grandmother.
I’ve been in several PF2e campaigns and rather than feeling dread starting at level 1 all over again, instead I feel ANTICIPATION. Because I’m still gonna be ready to fight on-level threats with some cool options available out the gate, but I also get to look forward to how I’m going to build out and customize my character as he levels up. That’s always exciting to look forward to. For me, anyways.
I’m trying to battle my own tendencies with rules lawyering. One of my buddies is starting the group’s first 2e game soon, and I don’t want to learn it before she does. In consequence, as much as I’d like to get my feet wet with 2e Pathfinder, 5e DnD is my go-to for this specific scenario.
Rules lawyering and backseat gaming are things I’m trying to work on too, so I feel you there. I personally don’t see a problem with learning the system before/as she does, but that’s because I feel like having a second perspective who can double-check and help answer questions would be helpful. I can see how it would easily turn into or be read as “um akshaully” though, and that’s never fun.
I genuinely hope you have fun with the game and learning the system! I really think you’ll find the customization and character creation to be a lot of fun, and honestly? I look forward to seeing how the experience with PF2e shows up in future comics, be it referencing the changes to classes between it and PF1e or how the system balances things like spell casting. Or just the author’s notes under each comic talking about how it’s going.
I mean, if possible, I’d ask the players what they think they’d prefer. But lacking an answer (or getting a “sure more complex is fine!” that sounds very flippant and poorly thought out)… I’d probably just do 1st level for completely new players.
Though I’d probably also maybe have them not engage is serious combat until level 2. Maybe walk them through some very easy encounters (where you maybe fudge dice rolls so they don’t die on accident*) just to get them used to how the game works and what their characters can do and otherwise focus on skills/roleplaying till they get enough xp/you’re using milestones and decide “ok level up now”.
*I think this is critically important because it’s very easy to people new to the game to get discouraged (possibly from the entire hobby) by “you spent hours making this character and whoops you just suddenly died”.
Though of course it all depends on the players and the choices you make. You can be a little more lethal if you’re the one doing the work of making the characters and you warn them first that you’re not pulling punches and have a few backup characters already on hand for them. Though that assumes they’re the kind of players who will enjoy characters someone else made for them. And still I think this is the inferior option because I think actually making the character in the mechanical sense gives a better grasp on how the rules work. Though… it really does take new players (and also me for different reasons) quite a long time to make a character themselves. *shrug*
But… if you have players who have played 5e even once before they’re probably going to prefer starting at 3rd level and they’ll most likely handle it fine. 3rd level isn’t that much more complex in terms of things to learn. But yeah for completely new players…. having to learn more than the bare minimum is just extra work they don’t need yet.
But there’s always exceptions. Like if you’d given *me* the choice, I’d probably have started with 3rd level characters right away. As I’d rather struggle a bit to remember how things work than have characters that can’t do much….and honestly 5e is a little weird in that depending on what you’re doing you’d build a character very differently starting at 3rd* than you would at 1st (because depending on archetype there’s stuff you suddenly do/don’t care about that you otherwise might/might not in the previous two levels).
So… I guess for that consideration you have to consider how long this game is supposed to be. Or… you could just let players fiddle with their mechanics once they hit level 3 if it’d make some kind of difference. *shrug*
*As a note, this can also be a thing about 4th level where you might be getting your first Feat which might be critical to your intended mechanical setup. (For me this tends to occur a lot regarding War Caster/Resilience: Con because it’ll effect if I’m even going to bother having Concentration spells yet.)
My current thought process is:
— Start ’em at first with pregens.
— Level up after session 1 and 2.
— Write in some kind of story explanation for a “free rebuild” when they hit 3rd.
Any thoughts on that approach?
That sounds pretty solid to me!
I wish you and your players the best of luck btw.
If they’re newbies, start at first level. Easier to keep track of things and learn the game properly, plus you can threaten them with all sorts of fun beasties you can’t use later cause the party is too powerful. The sense of progression and survival is part of the joy!
In other news, I have to share something completely off topic but something I can’t brag about to my friends (cause they’re playing it). A murder mystery set in a gnome hamlet called The Patch, complete with crime scene sketches like found on this page: https://gamenightblog.com/2020/12/12/waterdeep-dragon-heist-saviors-campaign-diary-8/. Only twist? All 50 gnomes are named after Benedict Cumberbatch in a word burger way. Blunderbuss Calvinball, Bogota Cataphract, Bouncyball Cucumber, etc. There are plenty of other clues, but my favorite clue is that the murderer has a 4-syllable name.
> There are plenty of other clues, but my favorite clue is that the murderer has a 4-syllable name.
Out here playing Guess Who as a dnd mystery. Bloody brilliant!
If somebody came out with a literal guess who with 50 gnome portraits I’d lose my shit.
Colin, you are a dangerous person to know. I hadn’t considered Guess Who, but you’re totally right. That’s what I’m doing now, making a set of gnome Guess Who cards. All the clues will be in fragments of the murdered gnome’s notebook, scattered throughout the Patch.
I know a lot of people will claim that early levels are “boring” or “too deadly”, but I have always been of the opinion that level 1 play (which doesn’t have to last that long) is important to developing the group dynamic. Both player and characters.
Sometimes it is taken for granted that these characters or the players playing them can just immediately work together and are HEROES EXTRAORDINAIRE! But I find without actually playing out those early levels, there are missing elements that most players (even good ones) can’t replicate through simple knowledge and background concept.
You *need* to actually play out those early levels to get used to who you are playing and how they interreact with everyone else in the group. Even if you are a table of great friends, the characters still need time to get to know each other, because even if the characters are also good friends, you JUST made them, and it is harder than you think to *fake* a relationship in a game when that relationship isn’t developed in a mostly natural way.
Now if all you are doing is dungeon crawls with no real RP involved, then start at whatever level is *fun* (but I still like to start that kind of thing at level 1 as well)
Is there a reason you can’t get that same “low level feel” at third level? Is there something mechanically that makes you “too powerful” by that point to feel like a hard scrabble band of desperate shmucks?
yes, literally the mechanics. You are already actually powerful and capable. At first level (or even zero level if you attempt that), you are so extremely limited in what capabilities you have, you have to really think about what you plan to do. Without access to the “one more spell slot” or that 2nd level spell, or just one more rage, or a few more Ki, you are forced to make decisions that keep you or your “new” *friends* alive… or not. (at least from a tactical perspective)
If you are already level 3 or 4 (or worse, games that start at level 5, giving access to a LOT more powerful spells and abilities) and trying to *fake* that start of not having adventured before, it feels fake. Because to get to that point, you have to have adventured. You have to have gone out and survived and come back with the stories.
Starting beyond level 1, you have to create that background of what you did to get beyond level 1, while if you start AT level 1, all you have to know is why you began adventuring in the first place, then attempt to survive that “first encounter”.
At least that has always been my experience with the game.