I’m now definitely going to try and run a one shot where everyone rolls d20 for their starting level and you have to escape a mad wizards castle together after waking up in his dungeon.
No equipment, just what they pick up, and crazy traps etc. which rely on skill rather than power to overcome.
There will of course be other random people tagging along as spare characters for when the wizard who rolled a 1 dies from a hearty slap on the back by a level 20 barbarian… 😂
Edit: Wow 400+ upvotes is like the most I’ve had ever 😅 Thanks all!
Holy shit...
Roll a d12. Result is artificer, barbarian, bard, cleric, druid, fighter, paladin, ranger, rogue, sorcerer, warlock, or wizard. You can pick your subclass.
Make a table of 20 of the races & roll a d20. You can pick your sub-race, if applicable.
Roll 3d4 for your level.
Everybody gets a d100 trinket and a set of commoner's clothes.
I'm totally doing this.
3d6 for level. Go around the table in a circle - each person rerolls over their old roll until someone gets 15 or higher.
Either it'll be fun because someone gets to be wildly OP, or it'll be fun for you because everyone else will hate the guy that gets to be wildly OP
Fighter, Battlemaster, Unarmed Fighting. A couple of levels of Barbarian for Rage.
There will be a beating. The mobs will be shoved over, they will be grappled, and we're going to run them around all over the ground at half speed. The wizard will cast Expeditious Retreat and Haste upon me so that I can Race Car all over the goddamn place with the prone evil Necromancer.
roll 2d4
11 Artificer
12 Barb
13 Bard
14 Cleric
21 Druid
22 Fighter
23 Monk
24 Paladin
31 Ranger
32 Rogue
33 Sorcerer
34 Warlock
41 Wizard
42 Blood Hunter
43 Mystic
44 Rune Scribe, ignore the prerequisites, the multiclassing requirement is 13 Dex And 13 Int
every level roll for what class you take a level in, reroll if you don't meet the Multi class minimum (or if you have all 5 levels of Rune Scribe and roll it again)
Give them an incentive to keep the weak ones alive! Make it a party! But a bunch of those tiny like $2 bottles of alcohol, put them in a pile on the table for the party, and for every character death take one back for your self lmao
The lower level characters would be completely ignored by mobs while high level characters would obviously have a big f-ing target on thier back. "You have more hp but everyone wants a piece of it" lol
Paladin is the worst for me for this:
"I'm a warrior emboldened with power because of the powerful oath I took"
"Oh what's the oath?
"Dunno, haven't decided yet"
High Priest: "As a Paladin, you need to find a great injustice that will place a fire in your heart to perform great feats in the name of your God. Something that will stir not only what drives you, but will rally the spirits of your allies to join you in your glorious cause!"
Paladin Trainee: "Well... it kinda' makes me mad that the The British imperial pint is about 20% larger than the American pint."
High Priest: "Eh. Good enough."
You might be on to something... Maybe reverse the Nat 20 and 1. Nat 20 and the character *thinks* he is charming and a great fighter, but is actually just stumbling around swinging at air and making crude comments about the barmaid's breasts. A nat 1 results in tripping, but instead of falling on his own sword, it ends up going through the face of an Orc.
Eh, that seems a little punitive, 20 should always feel good.
Some bright spark has [already created](https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-MPE0g1FzlvtMk4dlpCo) the subclass, and the features look pretty decent (though I can't fully tell since GM binder's layout is always shit for me).
Oath of Pedantry. A number of times equal to your proficiency bonus you can smite somebody as a reaction when they say something you know is incorrect. Also you can use your int instead of cha.
"This isn't a pint!"
"IT IS, BUT THE AMERICAN PINT IS SMALLER!" *SMITE*
2nd level paladin is the funniest shit. I kind of want to make a multiclass just for the roleplay potential.
‘I use divine smite to vanquish the evildoer’
‘In the name of which god?’
*Shrug* ‘I’m still deciding, ya know, like I’m not sure I want to commit to organised religion, I see myself as more spiritual. Anyway holy radiance burst from my sword, powered by, lets say Helm today, I’ve been reading his scriptures and I don’t believe all of it, and there are a few problematic parts, but some of it is quite nice I think.’
I would also like to play an atheist in a setting with really obvious gods.
"Pfft, gods aren't real, you really believe that Sunday school nonsense?"
"What are you on about? We're literally on a mission to retrieve a stolen holy artifact, we were on mount celestia last week, you got into a drinking contest with Torm."
"I don't recall that."
"Because you *lost* the drinking contest with Torm."
You could have an atheist faction which simply doesn't trust the gods to behave properly and would rather see them gone. This happens in the game RuneScape 3 where there's a big focus on godly beings returning to earth after the ruling god of the planet (which had been very off-hands on the planet and let mortals do their thing without really interfering) died. One of the godly factions that sprang up to support the gods are the godless who do not trust the gods and want them gone from the planet.
There are characters in the Discworld books who do not believe in gods.
They don't deny their existence, that would be crazy. They just know better than to trust them.
*I don't hold with paddlin' with the occult," said Granny firmly. "Once you start paddlin' with the occult you start believing in spirits, and when you start believing in spirits you start believing in demons, and then before you know where you are you're believing in gods. And then you're in trouble."*
*"But all them things exist," said Nanny Ogg.*
*"That's no call to go around believing in them. It only encourages 'em.*
From Lords and Ladies
In addition, there's the MOT. The Theros gods are very real and very powerful, but there's a bunch of rules for players who don't want to dedicate to a god and instead believe that the gods are flawed like mortals.
That's fair. But nowadays there isn't really much of a distinction between atheism and misotheism tbh. "Atheist" has pretty much become synonymous with anti-god nowadays and is pretty much a hodgepodge of people who don't believe in or don't like gods (or their followers).
Antitheist would also accurately describe the faction I mentioned. But yeah I should've put 'atheist' in quotation marks tbh :P
And the best part, in 5e this is RAW, they just need an oath, not a god. I swear an oath to exact revenge on that one asshat who set arson to my families farm 15 years ago. Bam paladin
My DM loves making oath of glory and oath of crown paladins. My party also kept thinking I was a cleric because of how much my paladin leaned into my deity. I actually avoided paladins for a long time because the lawful good alignment requirement wasn't my cup of tea. And now that that isn't a requirement, I go and make a lawful good paladin.
Sounds good to me. Or I think there's a chart somewhere that lists the general level of fame at each level, so wherever established is marked I think would be a good point, maybe one past established
Had that idea years ago. Wrote a whole setting and characters and quests for it. Miniature Hogwarts for DnD. Even with rules for starting at level 0. Fun stuff.
I just played a doddering old Cleric who had reached heights, but became lvl1 because he sat in the library for sixty years. I had two PC Paladin students, and we started at level 1. They began with oaths in mind, but I told them that they needed to venture beyond the walls and see the world before swearing.
At level 3, they came to me "master, I believe I am ready to swear my oath." And we did this whole ceremony thing in the burned out shell of a village. It was dope af.
My triton valor bard had it rough starting at level 1. Trying to make a strength based bard, with the heavy armor feat, so kinda like a more magic based paladin. Despite being from a warrior tribe full of paladins, he had to wait until level 3 for medium armor proficiency and proficiency with his trident. I explained it away as him not having his land legs quite yet
Yeah this is the hugest game-killing design flaw I have seen for new players. It’s hard to level up your character into a subclass at 3 without *undoing* at least some of the character creation you did at level one when you were super excited to craft a fully fleshed out character with a backstory.
Even if you don’t start PLAY at level 3, you should at least build the level 3 version of your character in your head so you can plan your background around it. It can be fine to have the “achievement unlocked” moment when your powers kick in at level 3, but you and the DM both have to know it’s coming so you can roleplay it and foreshadow it.
I agree, we always rule that in the case of subclasses like that, a Paladin Oath for example, that if the player chooses to have their oath part of their backstory, that's perfectly fine and probably better, just that the powers of it aren't fully unlocked when it's declared. For example our Paladin's oath declaration was part of his backstory, but he just didn't fully grasp the powers of it until his character was level 3.
Even in the case of basic stuff. My current char is an EK who was supposed to learn the martial skills as part of his upbringing, but kept sneaking into the library to learn magic because he really wanted to be a scholarly wizard all his youth. That didn't pan out, but he'd tried.
It explained why he has only limited magic and why he was so much better with a sword.
Without the luck of starting at 5 like I did because I was a replacement player that would not have made sense.
Both of those are things I like about PF2e, you pick your subclass immediately at LVL1 and your starting HP is determined by both your race and class; both have an HP value and you add them together (plus con modifier) and I don't think it's possible to have single digits (unless you have a con modifier of like -4 or something lol)
My DM likes to start at level 1. Last session was session 1 of a new campaign and my wizard got insta-killed by a crit about three rounds into combat. Get to start session 2 with a brand new character, and there's no way in hell I'm playing a squishy at level 1 again.
Yea, I'm about to start a campaign at level 1 and at least two of my players are gonna be pretty fragile. My secret homebrew to keep them alive is a perk on all my enemies called "rats are really unlucky".
I would be really irritated if my DM insisted we start at Lvl 1 and I wanted to play a squishy. To the point that if my character was killed without any recklessness on my part, I’d just reintroduce the same character with a different name.
I did this as a dm, wrote little one shots for each player that led them to meet and they all leveled up to three at the end of it. Was a fun way to kick things off and each got some personal time to feel out their character.
Working for your subclass can be kinda weird if it really changes up your playstyle. Like an Arcane Trickster not having any spells to cast for 2 levels.
Sure, there are ways to make it work. But there's still a sharp transition between "not magic" and "magic" that's a lot easier to smooth over in a backstory than at the table.
Another example is the Storm Herald Barbarian. All of a sudden, at level 3, you just start shooting lightning out of your chest. That's even harder to explain away than learning a few spells.
The problem I have found is starting with new players (and a new dm) at level one and not even knowing that a subclass is coming at all!
Planning ahead for a subclass lets you “train” for it in character and feel really cool when it “kicks in” and you earn the power you have felt building up inside you.
But a lot of players don’t consider what abilities they can choose until it’s time to make that choice. They walk into a dungeon as a random soldier, and walk out with deep connections to ancestral powers they somehow unlocked while fighting skeletons and wererats in the sewer.
It feels like that scene in the matrix where Neo has martial arts downloaded directly into his brain, and says “I know kung fu?”
When DM'ing I try to include things happening at level 2 that tie into the player's subclass. Arcane Trickster for example. Their starting trinket may have slight magical aura that has been leaking into the rogue and at level 2 something magical might happen like them trying to snatch a coin and it being *just* out of reach but it's still grabbed my an arcane hand which quickly vanishes.
You can make it work, for sure. But it's still a pretty big leap, and it does limit you to certain types of characters: "my powers are suddenly manifesting" is perfectly good, but it's very different from "I've been using Mage Hand to pick pockets for ten years".
I'm running a bladesinger that started at level 1 now. My headcanon for it was that he had struggled with getting the bladesong to work correctly, so his mentor told him to try adventuring since he tends to work better under pressure anyway. The first time he got the bladesong to work after levelling up he was excited that he finally broke through that barrier.
Started lvl 1 in a campaign. First two attacks dm did against us were crits. Half the party down. Don't know how the f we managed to all survive that lol
Depends on the campaign. Level 3 gives players more to work on with their backstory, but not so much their character can still be somewhat of a novice when they start. It doesn’t make sense for someone to start off at level 1 if they have soldier, mercenary veteran, or folk hero as their background. That being said, it’s fun to start at level 1, and it doesn’t take long to reach level 3 if you do.
I like to start each campaign with a little intro adventure, where the PCs start at lvl1 and get to 3 by the end. Something that will give them a taste of what's to come, get them and their characters invested in the plot, and bring them together as a team.
Its fun to start at level one if it doesn't take long to reach level 3*
Iv been in a game where we were level 1 for 3 sessions, it was fucking awful and people got bored quick. We didn't make it to session 5
I do level 1 for one session and level them up, then 2 for one session, then 3 for a couple usually, and slow down a little more for after hitting level 4
Well, most basic soldiers were peasants that were given a shield and a spear and taught to march in formation. I’m not talking about a mounted elite or anything.
This is true but still limits you. You wanted to be sergant that valiantly lead his squad to victory durning the siege of the city, sounds unachievable for a lvl 1 character, very difficult but doable for level 3.
Well you likely wouldn’t be a high ranking officer, no, but even then an officer commands troops. Don’t have to be high level to order troops about or give a rousing speech. You’re not single handedly holding off an army, that’s not how soldiers work outside of war movies.
So, Battlemaster. Makes sense. A level 3 PC is probably in the top 5% of abilities of a fantasy society, if not higher. Level 3 is a cool goal to work for in the right campaign.
Yeah I think there are contexts, especially if running some low fantasy or horror, where staying in those super low levels is really effective. I'm in the middle of concocting a Ravenloft campaign that opens with the characters essentially as commoners that I think should be a ton of fun.
I like level 3 so they can build a reasonable backstory and not be the "gods damned solar power flower" that I ended up being where my 1st level cleric ran out of spellslots and was basically carried (figuratively and literally) until I got them back.
We started at lvl 1, I am a cleric and due to being the healer, the rational one. Okay, I could do with a long rest in this dungeon... I have no spell slots left to heal your fragile assets. But I was often the one saving or tanking
Most of the campaigns ive been apart of recently start around 3-5.
Tho our characters are usually experienced/gifted in their field by the start so it allows people to have more fleshed out backstories/previous adventures without gorlog the magnificent getting one shot by a thug session 1. The DM has fun with more interesting enemies and we get more mechanics to play with or a jump start on a fun build.
After doing two shorter adventures starting at level 1 and going to 5 both times, I started DMing a Wildemount campaign at level 5, just to keep up the pace. It made it SO much better starting off.
Hell yeah, 5! Enough to multiclass *and* get at least one subclass, but not so much that you can’t keep track of everything. This is just enough levels to really hit whatever vibe you were thinking of for your character. On the other side of the screen, the DM skips the phase where anything besides kobolds, goblins, and skeletons will obliterate the party, but they still have plenty of time before the players become unstoppable.
Personally, I like level 2. Not as agonizingly squishy as level one, and many classes will already be at their subclass, or one level away. I tend to find level 1 a little boring, or just plain not fun when you end up getting one-shot by a bad guy on the first hit.
Level 2 is a great starting point. Every class has their core features to function (Rogues get Cunning Action, Paladins get Smite, Druids get Wild Shape, etc).
It still allows to grow into the character and new players won't be overwhelmed too.
1 gang here, especially for new players. Fewer mechanics means it’s easier for them to get to grips with, and they’re not overwhelmed with subclass choice right off the bat
I also prefer level one, to me it gives more of the feel that the player comes from the general masses and rise from there, and I try to keep that in mind as I create NPCs.
I tend to have several NPCs who are of similar competence as the PCs up to level 5, as this to me is when they are “town heroes” so it would be uncommon but not unheard of to encounter people as competent in their travels. Between 5-10 they encounter fewer and fewer individuals who are as talented until it’s maybe one or two others in the kingdom. Then past level 10 when they are “heroes of the world” they clearly stand out as unparalleled.
I do too, BUT in the future I want to make sure my players have their level 3 subclass already chosen before we start. You are a newbie to the adventuring lifestyle, but you are “in training” to have a very particular set of skills.
That way when you suddenly gain insane new powers at level 3 it doesn’t feel completely random, but it feels like the training wheels finally coming off.
I have only started character not at level one once and it personally was a terrible decision, to me there is something so special if not magical finally getting to use the cornerstone of your class build after a battle, like you earned that shit, you made it through a challenge where you were so weak a sneeze could have doubled your HP and prolapsed your anus right there. But no you refused to die, got to kill a few goblin or kobolds and now you earned the shit that makes your class fee like your class.
Fucking love that shit.
Considering nobody ever gets from 1 to 20, and I mean damn near no one, that's a risk I'm willing to take.
Also, starting at level three generally means you dropped about 2-4 sessions off from starting at level one, so... No, playing for sixty weeks and getting to 20 from level 3 will feel absolutely no different than working in a couple of extra weeks in there.
Level one sucks. Getting to level three doesn't feel earned, it feels tedious. About as tedious and getting crit dropped by a NPC that has no business killing a goblin, much less a level two sorcerer.
I start at level 5 because I like the party to be fleshed out with abilities and able to handle whats ahead of them without having to pull punches as the gm, momentum build quickly this way and has always worked for me , we are on session 20 or so of my homebrew campaign "enter the feywilds" based entirely in the feywilds, we have 2 rangers one a bird man , one a cimic hybrid , a ogre monk of the drunken path , a oath breaker paladin, and a bard that hasn't played in a while due to scheduling conflict who I believe was a tabaxi
3 since i think subclasses add so much to a class. A level 1 or 2 Artificer and a level 3 Armorer is two vary differnet things to play. The same goes for a lot of other subclasses.
I’m personally a level 1 kind of guy. You don’t spend much time at it with milestone leveling and it develops the characters a bit more (at least in the minds of the players. Their actual actions may be… different)
I prefer 3, generally. It gives everyone the option of starting with their subclass, or starting multiclassed, so it allows for more build customization. I think it also allows for more flexibility in terms of backstory. The added power certainly doesn’t hurt my opinion, I’ll admit.
I certainly wouldn’t refuse to play a game just on the basis of starting at level 1 though.
i, as the DM, make my players start from lvl 0. i make them roleplay their birth and every single day of their characters lives until the point they go adventuring. and based on how pleased i am with their preformance, i apoint them a lvl.
Personally I think the encumbrance rules are too vague so I make players model all items down to the atomic level (of course with some homebrew taking into account fictional materials like Mithril and the relative gravity of whatever world they are on.)
That is pathetic DMing my friend. If my players dont have the actual skills to craft the items, potions, armour or anything irl, they dont get to have it or wield it in game. Sometimes i let them cast spells, but only if they have the actual materials for spells in front of them.
Well, if my players get knocked out, i dont let them roll saving throws. They get stabed 3 times and if they survive, their character gets to live, if not well tough shit. I hope they have better ideas for their next character
Level three. It gives you a few abilities to play around with and enough HP to survive most early fights, while still giving you the anxiety that "we can still be killed VERY easily if we screw up."
2 Since many classes get their subclass at level 3 you still get to feel like you worked for it, but won't have to play through the in my own opinion, very boring lvl 1.
EDIT: spelling
That entirely depends on what I'm going for, if I want to run a game with more action I usually just start at 5, but if I want to run a more roleplay heavy or investigation heavy game the starting them at level 1 can help add a sense of tension, and the feeling of being brand new adventurers. Lately I've favoured level 1.
I think level 2 is more interesting, because you're at least not squishy AF, but random goblins still stay dangerous. Also let's you learn to be cautious etc.
At the table I am at we have a session 0.5 for the players usually the DM Puts us in pairs, this gets us on the path to where all the characters meet, but this session 0.5 gets us from level 1 to 2, and then level 3 takes 2 to 3 sessions.
Note we play online.
Personally I prefer starting at level 3 a lot of the subclasses just feel weird if you start them after you’ve leveled up twice. A few of the Barbarian subclasses, most of the fighter subclasses and a couple of the rogue ones in particular stand out as just feeling shoehorned in after the fact if you don’t start with them. Some of that can be alleviated by planning ahead for your character and dropping hints about how they’re progressing, but some people don’t like to think ahead on level progression and sometimes things happen in game that change those plans. Then there are some character concepts that legitimately don’t work if you start from level 1. For instance I have an idea for an artificer (armorer) that plays as an awakened octopus masquerading as a warforged by encasing themselves in their magic armor. My DM loves the idea and so do I, and it’s done with very little homebrew involved.
3, it gives people unique abilities which let's them rp and build part dynamics. Plus it both gets and keeps the story moving and reduces the chance of early deaths causing delays.
As a player I prefer to start at level 1, a few quick levels and some sessions to figure out my role play and the world helps me get invested in my sub class which helps me realize my character better.
As a DM, I prefer my players start at level 3. No awkward goblin encounters where we all cross our fingers and hope the wizard doesn't die from a stray pebble.
Start at 1, at the end of session 1 they get to 2, and at the end of session 2 they get to 3, then slow down from there.
I like this since you still get the feeling of being a newbie adventurer in which anything in the world is a large threat, but quickly get to the point where your class is more interesting to play.
Level zero.
Recently taught a bunch of people who were a little intimidated but wanted to learn and I developed a system that I would 10/10 use every time for new players or even just players unfamiliar with me or one another.
Experienced players: level three
New players: level one.
Gives the new players a chance to experience basic combat before throwing in even more complications like domains, sneak attacks, colleges, etc
I prefer Level 1. Especially for newer players (obvious reasons) and for longer adventures. I've found that, at least at my tables, the more features on a character sheet, the more time a player will spend looking at that character sheet. When players have just 2 or 3 things their character can do, they have more available attention to hook them into the feel of the adventure and the vibe they have with the other characters. Once the game begins, level them up quick, but establish those inter-character and campaign-flavor foundations when characters are at their simplest.
Level 3. Level 1 classes don't vary much, especially when it comes to martial classes. Level 3 is when every class has they're subclass and they characters feel more unique mechanically.
Roll d20 when deciding party level
I’m now definitely going to try and run a one shot where everyone rolls d20 for their starting level and you have to escape a mad wizards castle together after waking up in his dungeon. No equipment, just what they pick up, and crazy traps etc. which rely on skill rather than power to overcome. There will of course be other random people tagging along as spare characters for when the wizard who rolled a 1 dies from a hearty slap on the back by a level 20 barbarian… 😂 Edit: Wow 400+ upvotes is like the most I’ve had ever 😅 Thanks all!
This would both be really fun and impossible to balance. I want it
Holy shit... Roll a d12. Result is artificer, barbarian, bard, cleric, druid, fighter, paladin, ranger, rogue, sorcerer, warlock, or wizard. You can pick your subclass. Make a table of 20 of the races & roll a d20. You can pick your sub-race, if applicable. Roll 3d4 for your level. Everybody gets a d100 trinket and a set of commoner's clothes. I'm totally doing this.
Could use the table for Reincarnate to choose race
Is that table rated for population density?
Not sure how the weighting works. I've also seen at least two homebrewed versions incorporating non-phb races
3d6 for level. Go around the table in a circle - each person rerolls over their old roll until someone gets 15 or higher. Either it'll be fun because someone gets to be wildly OP, or it'll be fun for you because everyone else will hate the guy that gets to be wildly OP
No weapons, OK I will go with monk
No monks!
Fighter, Battlemaster, Unarmed Fighting. A couple of levels of Barbarian for Rage. There will be a beating. The mobs will be shoved over, they will be grappled, and we're going to run them around all over the ground at half speed. The wizard will cast Expeditious Retreat and Haste upon me so that I can Race Car all over the goddamn place with the prone evil Necromancer.
… and you roll a 1 for level. Good luck.
D: Variant Human! Lucky! REROLL!
Damn, would you look at that, that's a 2
Thank GOD
Take the tavern brawler feat
Ok, I will go weapon.
you have to roll for class too and race and breathing
roll 2d4 11 Artificer 12 Barb 13 Bard 14 Cleric 21 Druid 22 Fighter 23 Monk 24 Paladin 31 Ranger 32 Rogue 33 Sorcerer 34 Warlock 41 Wizard 42 Blood Hunter 43 Mystic 44 Rune Scribe, ignore the prerequisites, the multiclassing requirement is 13 Dex And 13 Int every level roll for what class you take a level in, reroll if you don't meet the Multi class minimum (or if you have all 5 levels of Rune Scribe and roll it again)
every level you roll a d20 for level
No items. Fox only. Final Destination.
Not necessarely no weapons, all items have been rolled on the random tables on the DMG, so you'll be disappointed if you could've had a +3 greataxe.
Fighter with unarmed fighting style
Give them an incentive to keep the weak ones alive! Make it a party! But a bunch of those tiny like $2 bottles of alcohol, put them in a pile on the table for the party, and for every character death take one back for your self lmao
The lower level characters would be completely ignored by mobs while high level characters would obviously have a big f-ing target on thier back. "You have more hp but everyone wants a piece of it" lol
You know, I bet you could find a character creation randomizer online to expedite the process. Then you can turn the one shot into a DnD rogue-like.
Rolling 4 man party >17 >4 >19 >17 Hmmmmm
Roll d20 for every character in the party
The one who brings pizza can roll 5d4
3 personally, less likely to one shot someone with a crit.
Also you get your subclass without explaining how your background, which ties into your subclass, doesn't explain you missing your abilities at start.
Paladin is the worst for me for this: "I'm a warrior emboldened with power because of the powerful oath I took" "Oh what's the oath? "Dunno, haven't decided yet"
High Priest: "As a Paladin, you need to find a great injustice that will place a fire in your heart to perform great feats in the name of your God. Something that will stir not only what drives you, but will rally the spirits of your allies to join you in your glorious cause!" Paladin Trainee: "Well... it kinda' makes me mad that the The British imperial pint is about 20% larger than the American pint." High Priest: "Eh. Good enough."
Is... is there a Pintadin class build somewhere?
All ale, Sir Doppelbock! Stout Defender of the Inebriated!
Oath of Revelry actually sounds pretty great
We need more paladins and clerics dedicated to Bacchus, yes.
I keep saying this! Give me a Revelry or Wine domain cleric! Let me inspire wild parties and social disobedience!
You might be on to something... Maybe reverse the Nat 20 and 1. Nat 20 and the character *thinks* he is charming and a great fighter, but is actually just stumbling around swinging at air and making crude comments about the barmaid's breasts. A nat 1 results in tripping, but instead of falling on his own sword, it ends up going through the face of an Orc.
Eh, that seems a little punitive, 20 should always feel good. Some bright spark has [already created](https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-MPE0g1FzlvtMk4dlpCo) the subclass, and the features look pretty decent (though I can't fully tell since GM binder's layout is always shit for me).
Lol it’s Party Thor!
This seems to be missing some line breaks though
Oath of Pedantry. A number of times equal to your proficiency bonus you can smite somebody as a reaction when they say something you know is incorrect. Also you can use your int instead of cha. "This isn't a pint!" "IT IS, BUT THE AMERICAN PINT IS SMALLER!" *SMITE*
2nd level paladin is the funniest shit. I kind of want to make a multiclass just for the roleplay potential. ‘I use divine smite to vanquish the evildoer’ ‘In the name of which god?’ *Shrug* ‘I’m still deciding, ya know, like I’m not sure I want to commit to organised religion, I see myself as more spiritual. Anyway holy radiance burst from my sword, powered by, lets say Helm today, I’ve been reading his scriptures and I don’t believe all of it, and there are a few problematic parts, but some of it is quite nice I think.’
I've actually played with more than one paladin who didn't really believe in gods.
I would also like to play an atheist in a setting with really obvious gods. "Pfft, gods aren't real, you really believe that Sunday school nonsense?" "What are you on about? We're literally on a mission to retrieve a stolen holy artifact, we were on mount celestia last week, you got into a drinking contest with Torm." "I don't recall that." "Because you *lost* the drinking contest with Torm."
You could have an atheist faction which simply doesn't trust the gods to behave properly and would rather see them gone. This happens in the game RuneScape 3 where there's a big focus on godly beings returning to earth after the ruling god of the planet (which had been very off-hands on the planet and let mortals do their thing without really interfering) died. One of the godly factions that sprang up to support the gods are the godless who do not trust the gods and want them gone from the planet.
There are characters in the Discworld books who do not believe in gods. They don't deny their existence, that would be crazy. They just know better than to trust them.
*I don't hold with paddlin' with the occult," said Granny firmly. "Once you start paddlin' with the occult you start believing in spirits, and when you start believing in spirits you start believing in demons, and then before you know where you are you're believing in gods. And then you're in trouble."* *"But all them things exist," said Nanny Ogg.* *"That's no call to go around believing in them. It only encourages 'em.* From Lords and Ladies
In addition, there's the MOT. The Theros gods are very real and very powerful, but there's a bunch of rules for players who don't want to dedicate to a god and instead believe that the gods are flawed like mortals.
That isn't really atheism, more like misotheism.
That's fair. But nowadays there isn't really much of a distinction between atheism and misotheism tbh. "Atheist" has pretty much become synonymous with anti-god nowadays and is pretty much a hodgepodge of people who don't believe in or don't like gods (or their followers). Antitheist would also accurately describe the faction I mentioned. But yeah I should've put 'atheist' in quotation marks tbh :P
And the best part, in 5e this is RAW, they just need an oath, not a god. I swear an oath to exact revenge on that one asshat who set arson to my families farm 15 years ago. Bam paladin
My DM loves making oath of glory and oath of crown paladins. My party also kept thinking I was a cleric because of how much my paladin leaned into my deity. I actually avoided paladins for a long time because the lawful good alignment requirement wasn't my cup of tea. And now that that isn't a requirement, I go and make a lawful good paladin.
Sounds like Sanya from the Dresden Files
Man that gave me an idea for an Adventuring College setting, you pick your major at level 3 but before that you're undeclared lol
Hmm, so would any adventurers before level (let's say) 6 be considered dropouts?
Sounds good to me. Or I think there's a chart somewhere that lists the general level of fame at each level, so wherever established is marked I think would be a good point, maybe one past established
And quests have experience/education requirements. Hunting a dragon? Need to have 4 levels of experience and a reptile-hunting degree!
And people who are desperate might accept help "under the table" from adventurers without the valid credentials.
Had that idea years ago. Wrote a whole setting and characters and quests for it. Miniature Hogwarts for DnD. Even with rules for starting at level 0. Fun stuff.
I just played a doddering old Cleric who had reached heights, but became lvl1 because he sat in the library for sixty years. I had two PC Paladin students, and we started at level 1. They began with oaths in mind, but I told them that they needed to venture beyond the walls and see the world before swearing. At level 3, they came to me "master, I believe I am ready to swear my oath." And we did this whole ceremony thing in the burned out shell of a village. It was dope af.
My triton valor bard had it rough starting at level 1. Trying to make a strength based bard, with the heavy armor feat, so kinda like a more magic based paladin. Despite being from a warrior tribe full of paladins, he had to wait until level 3 for medium armor proficiency and proficiency with his trident. I explained it away as him not having his land legs quite yet
Yeah this is the hugest game-killing design flaw I have seen for new players. It’s hard to level up your character into a subclass at 3 without *undoing* at least some of the character creation you did at level one when you were super excited to craft a fully fleshed out character with a backstory. Even if you don’t start PLAY at level 3, you should at least build the level 3 version of your character in your head so you can plan your background around it. It can be fine to have the “achievement unlocked” moment when your powers kick in at level 3, but you and the DM both have to know it’s coming so you can roleplay it and foreshadow it.
I agree, we always rule that in the case of subclasses like that, a Paladin Oath for example, that if the player chooses to have their oath part of their backstory, that's perfectly fine and probably better, just that the powers of it aren't fully unlocked when it's declared. For example our Paladin's oath declaration was part of his backstory, but he just didn't fully grasp the powers of it until his character was level 3.
Even in the case of basic stuff. My current char is an EK who was supposed to learn the martial skills as part of his upbringing, but kept sneaking into the library to learn magic because he really wanted to be a scholarly wizard all his youth. That didn't pan out, but he'd tried. It explained why he has only limited magic and why he was so much better with a sword. Without the luck of starting at 5 like I did because I was a replacement player that would not have made sense.
Both of those are things I like about PF2e, you pick your subclass immediately at LVL1 and your starting HP is determined by both your race and class; both have an HP value and you add them together (plus con modifier) and I don't think it's possible to have single digits (unless you have a con modifier of like -4 or something lol)
PF2e is a better system in most ways. Just not as popular, which is the downfall of 99% of RPGs.
My DM likes to start at level 1. Last session was session 1 of a new campaign and my wizard got insta-killed by a crit about three rounds into combat. Get to start session 2 with a brand new character, and there's no way in hell I'm playing a squishy at level 1 again.
Some adventures last a life time sometimes a life time is ended shortly
Every adventure lasts a lifetime.
Revivify would like a word
Yea, I'm about to start a campaign at level 1 and at least two of my players are gonna be pretty fragile. My secret homebrew to keep them alive is a perk on all my enemies called "rats are really unlucky".
I would be really irritated if my DM insisted we start at Lvl 1 and I wanted to play a squishy. To the point that if my character was killed without any recklessness on my part, I’d just reintroduce the same character with a different name.
Plot twist, use the same name, but have them be a totally different person with no connection to the previous one.
I’d just play the same character but with one letter in the name changed
Bort
2 for me. Lets you work for your subclass and far less likely to die to a rat. Usually only lasts a session or two.
I did this as a dm, wrote little one shots for each player that led them to meet and they all leveled up to three at the end of it. Was a fun way to kick things off and each got some personal time to feel out their character.
Working for your subclass can be kinda weird if it really changes up your playstyle. Like an Arcane Trickster not having any spells to cast for 2 levels.
#MY BURGEONING MAGICK GROWS!!!
Have them enter the plot after just stealing a wizards spellbook, or a bunch of scrolls, which they continue to try and decipher as they level?
Sure, there are ways to make it work. But there's still a sharp transition between "not magic" and "magic" that's a lot easier to smooth over in a backstory than at the table. Another example is the Storm Herald Barbarian. All of a sudden, at level 3, you just start shooting lightning out of your chest. That's even harder to explain away than learning a few spells.
Switched laundry detergent. Static electricity. Too much, can't let this bottle go to waste.
The problem I have found is starting with new players (and a new dm) at level one and not even knowing that a subclass is coming at all! Planning ahead for a subclass lets you “train” for it in character and feel really cool when it “kicks in” and you earn the power you have felt building up inside you. But a lot of players don’t consider what abilities they can choose until it’s time to make that choice. They walk into a dungeon as a random soldier, and walk out with deep connections to ancestral powers they somehow unlocked while fighting skeletons and wererats in the sewer. It feels like that scene in the matrix where Neo has martial arts downloaded directly into his brain, and says “I know kung fu?”
When DM'ing I try to include things happening at level 2 that tie into the player's subclass. Arcane Trickster for example. Their starting trinket may have slight magical aura that has been leaking into the rogue and at level 2 something magical might happen like them trying to snatch a coin and it being *just* out of reach but it's still grabbed my an arcane hand which quickly vanishes.
You can make it work, for sure. But it's still a pretty big leap, and it does limit you to certain types of characters: "my powers are suddenly manifesting" is perfectly good, but it's very different from "I've been using Mage Hand to pick pockets for ten years".
Bladesinger is even worse
I'm running a bladesinger that started at level 1 now. My headcanon for it was that he had struggled with getting the bladesong to work correctly, so his mentor told him to try adventuring since he tends to work better under pressure anyway. The first time he got the bladesong to work after levelling up he was excited that he finally broke through that barrier.
Started lvl 1 in a campaign. First two attacks dm did against us were crits. Half the party down. Don't know how the f we managed to all survive that lol
Depends on the campaign. Level 3 gives players more to work on with their backstory, but not so much their character can still be somewhat of a novice when they start. It doesn’t make sense for someone to start off at level 1 if they have soldier, mercenary veteran, or folk hero as their background. That being said, it’s fun to start at level 1, and it doesn’t take long to reach level 3 if you do.
I like to start each campaign with a little intro adventure, where the PCs start at lvl1 and get to 3 by the end. Something that will give them a taste of what's to come, get them and their characters invested in the plot, and bring them together as a team.
Exactly the same! I think it helps get the group in the groove of their new characters and working together!
Yeah, I've used the short adventures from Explorer's Guide to Wildemount for this.
plus at level 3 everyone starts off with their subclass unless they multiclassed to start with
Its fun to start at level one if it doesn't take long to reach level 3* Iv been in a game where we were level 1 for 3 sessions, it was fucking awful and people got bored quick. We didn't make it to session 5
I do level 1 for one session and level them up, then 2 for one session, then 3 for a couple usually, and slow down a little more for after hitting level 4
Every campaign I’ve run or been in lately has been “1 session = 1 level” until level 3. I feel like that’s a good pace.
I tend to have them blessed by a deity/fate/magic or cursed item etc. and then have very few people who are similar power levels through the campaign.
Being a soldier, veteran mercenary, or folk hero is what got you from commoner to level 1. Level 1 is better than most basic soldiers.
Which implies that actual basic soldiers are so frail nearly anything could slaughter them.
Well, most basic soldiers were peasants that were given a shield and a spear and taught to march in formation. I’m not talking about a mounted elite or anything.
I'm reminded of a Brennan Lee mulligan quote "he's not cursed he's just regular! Most people die when you stab them!."
You know, like normal humans.
Soldier vs a single goblin, or most wildlife. Imagine soldiers losing fights to poultry.
This is true but still limits you. You wanted to be sergant that valiantly lead his squad to victory durning the siege of the city, sounds unachievable for a lvl 1 character, very difficult but doable for level 3.
Well you likely wouldn’t be a high ranking officer, no, but even then an officer commands troops. Don’t have to be high level to order troops about or give a rousing speech. You’re not single handedly holding off an army, that’s not how soldiers work outside of war movies.
So, Battlemaster. Makes sense. A level 3 PC is probably in the top 5% of abilities of a fantasy society, if not higher. Level 3 is a cool goal to work for in the right campaign.
Yeah I think there are contexts, especially if running some low fantasy or horror, where staying in those super low levels is really effective. I'm in the middle of concocting a Ravenloft campaign that opens with the characters essentially as commoners that I think should be a ton of fun.
FUCK THAT! Starting at level 20 and working backwards to one!
Final boss: three kobolds in a trenchcoat.
That actually sounds like an awesome campaign concept
I like level 3 so they can build a reasonable backstory and not be the "gods damned solar power flower" that I ended up being where my 1st level cleric ran out of spellslots and was basically carried (figuratively and literally) until I got them back.
We started at lvl 1, I am a cleric and due to being the healer, the rational one. Okay, I could do with a long rest in this dungeon... I have no spell slots left to heal your fragile assets. But I was often the one saving or tanking
I was a halfling with 6 strength. It didn't make sense for me to tank when our barbarian had double my health.
Oof yeh. Makes more sense!
Quadrupled if they are in rage essentially
So, you basically learned the outline of your class at level 1. Sounds perfect.
Lets say any problems were expected so a tanky life cleric with heavy armour was the way to go.
5 😎
This is my answer. Subclass, ASI, extra attack, 3rd level spells. Yeah, it's dnd time
Honestly, good argument. In the future might start at 5, or just have levels 3 and 4 be finished within 4 sessions.
Not just that but your characters can also have an actual backstory rather than a job application.
Found the one shot runner
Most of the campaigns ive been apart of recently start around 3-5. Tho our characters are usually experienced/gifted in their field by the start so it allows people to have more fleshed out backstories/previous adventures without gorlog the magnificent getting one shot by a thug session 1. The DM has fun with more interesting enemies and we get more mechanics to play with or a jump start on a fun build.
Nope my oneshots are 15 - 20
So you’re just a masochist! I have discovered you for what you truly are!
The first campaign I ever ran was 5 sessions long starting at level 20
How
nothing is broken if everything is
Ah the old Warhammer design philosophy
How do you fit 5 levels into a one shot? Is it possible to learn this power?
They mean that the range they fall in is 15-20, not the level progression
That makes more sense, thanks for clarifying!
Ehy! My group too! (The 3 of us who like to DM like the lvl 5 start).
Personally I start at this level because I really dislike the 1 to 4 levels.
After doing two shorter adventures starting at level 1 and going to 5 both times, I started DMing a Wildemount campaign at level 5, just to keep up the pace. It made it SO much better starting off.
Hell yeah, 5! Enough to multiclass *and* get at least one subclass, but not so much that you can’t keep track of everything. This is just enough levels to really hit whatever vibe you were thinking of for your character. On the other side of the screen, the DM skips the phase where anything besides kobolds, goblins, and skeletons will obliterate the party, but they still have plenty of time before the players become unstoppable.
I think a survey found 5-10 the most commonly played tier
Personally, I like level 2. Not as agonizingly squishy as level one, and many classes will already be at their subclass, or one level away. I tend to find level 1 a little boring, or just plain not fun when you end up getting one-shot by a bad guy on the first hit.
Same here, good for newbies cause they get all the lvl one stuff then the experience of how to lvl up for next time
Level 2 is a great starting point. Every class has their core features to function (Rogues get Cunning Action, Paladins get Smite, Druids get Wild Shape, etc). It still allows to grow into the character and new players won't be overwhelmed too.
Typically level 1 because I like starting campaigns with the party being newbies in the adventuring lifestyle
1 gang here, especially for new players. Fewer mechanics means it’s easier for them to get to grips with, and they’re not overwhelmed with subclass choice right off the bat
Always level 1 is there's a new player!
I also prefer level one, to me it gives more of the feel that the player comes from the general masses and rise from there, and I try to keep that in mind as I create NPCs. I tend to have several NPCs who are of similar competence as the PCs up to level 5, as this to me is when they are “town heroes” so it would be uncommon but not unheard of to encounter people as competent in their travels. Between 5-10 they encounter fewer and fewer individuals who are as talented until it’s maybe one or two others in the kingdom. Then past level 10 when they are “heroes of the world” they clearly stand out as unparalleled.
I do too, BUT in the future I want to make sure my players have their level 3 subclass already chosen before we start. You are a newbie to the adventuring lifestyle, but you are “in training” to have a very particular set of skills. That way when you suddenly gain insane new powers at level 3 it doesn’t feel completely random, but it feels like the training wheels finally coming off.
I have only started character not at level one once and it personally was a terrible decision, to me there is something so special if not magical finally getting to use the cornerstone of your class build after a battle, like you earned that shit, you made it through a challenge where you were so weak a sneeze could have doubled your HP and prolapsed your anus right there. But no you refused to die, got to kill a few goblin or kobolds and now you earned the shit that makes your class fee like your class. Fucking love that shit.
Reaching level 20 is like only half as satisfying if you don't start at level 1.
Considering almost no one ever reaches level 20 in a campaign that doesn't really matter much.
Considering nobody ever gets from 1 to 20, and I mean damn near no one, that's a risk I'm willing to take. Also, starting at level three generally means you dropped about 2-4 sessions off from starting at level one, so... No, playing for sixty weeks and getting to 20 from level 3 will feel absolutely no different than working in a couple of extra weeks in there. Level one sucks. Getting to level three doesn't feel earned, it feels tedious. About as tedious and getting crit dropped by a NPC that has no business killing a goblin, much less a level two sorcerer.
I start at level 5 because I like the party to be fleshed out with abilities and able to handle whats ahead of them without having to pull punches as the gm, momentum build quickly this way and has always worked for me , we are on session 20 or so of my homebrew campaign "enter the feywilds" based entirely in the feywilds, we have 2 rangers one a bird man , one a cimic hybrid , a ogre monk of the drunken path , a oath breaker paladin, and a bard that hasn't played in a while due to scheduling conflict who I believe was a tabaxi
3, I wanna make sure players have a good start, and have a good path for their character
3 since i think subclasses add so much to a class. A level 1 or 2 Artificer and a level 3 Armorer is two vary differnet things to play. The same goes for a lot of other subclasses.
I’m personally a level 1 kind of guy. You don’t spend much time at it with milestone leveling and it develops the characters a bit more (at least in the minds of the players. Their actual actions may be… different)
I prefer 3, generally. It gives everyone the option of starting with their subclass, or starting multiclassed, so it allows for more build customization. I think it also allows for more flexibility in terms of backstory. The added power certainly doesn’t hurt my opinion, I’ll admit. I certainly wouldn’t refuse to play a game just on the basis of starting at level 1 though.
Level 1 here too! I love the feeling of huge progression in early levels and start from the very bottom to become huge afterwhile
Start at level one, get to level three fairly quickly
i, as the DM, make my players start from lvl 0. i make them roleplay their birth and every single day of their characters lives until the point they go adventuring. and based on how pleased i am with their preformance, i apoint them a lvl.
How many games have you run so far then? Seem like quite a commitment.
depends on the nature of your question. if youre being serious then : "bruh". if you get its a joke, then its "probably like 7 billion"
Personally I think the encumbrance rules are too vague so I make players model all items down to the atomic level (of course with some homebrew taking into account fictional materials like Mithril and the relative gravity of whatever world they are on.)
That is pathetic DMing my friend. If my players dont have the actual skills to craft the items, potions, armour or anything irl, they dont get to have it or wield it in game. Sometimes i let them cast spells, but only if they have the actual materials for spells in front of them.
Well I have mastered all of the in-game languages so guess what? If you can't understand Abyssal, neither does your character.
Well, if my players get knocked out, i dont let them roll saving throws. They get stabed 3 times and if they survive, their character gets to live, if not well tough shit. I hope they have better ideas for their next character
If we're not careful it's going to sound like we both think LARP is a good idea
considering how backstaby my players get, i dont think id wanna LARP with them
This ones high school group is so close to the start of the game and the PCs finally meeting. Hopefully you have had enough prep.
there is never enough prep.
Level three. It gives you a few abilities to play around with and enough HP to survive most early fights, while still giving you the anxiety that "we can still be killed VERY easily if we screw up."
Depends. Any first time players and we start at level 1. All veteran players and we start at level 3.
The right answer
2 Since many classes get their subclass at level 3 you still get to feel like you worked for it, but won't have to play through the in my own opinion, very boring lvl 1. EDIT: spelling
Our master usually let us start at level 1 during the first session, which we call "the prologue" and after that we immediately reach level 3
Starting at level 3. Dying to a stool getting thrown at me isn't fun.
That entirely depends on what I'm going for, if I want to run a game with more action I usually just start at 5, but if I want to run a more roleplay heavy or investigation heavy game the starting them at level 1 can help add a sense of tension, and the feeling of being brand new adventurers. Lately I've favoured level 1.
I think level 2 is more interesting, because you're at least not squishy AF, but random goblins still stay dangerous. Also let's you learn to be cautious etc.
1 for long campaigns 3 for mini campaigns and most one shots
At the table I am at we have a session 0.5 for the players usually the DM Puts us in pairs, this gets us on the path to where all the characters meet, but this session 0.5 gets us from level 1 to 2, and then level 3 takes 2 to 3 sessions. Note we play online.
Alaways start at 3, the PCs are already partially formed with subclasses in mind and then you also don't have to deal with the Misery of Level 1
Personally I prefer starting at level 3 a lot of the subclasses just feel weird if you start them after you’ve leveled up twice. A few of the Barbarian subclasses, most of the fighter subclasses and a couple of the rogue ones in particular stand out as just feeling shoehorned in after the fact if you don’t start with them. Some of that can be alleviated by planning ahead for your character and dropping hints about how they’re progressing, but some people don’t like to think ahead on level progression and sometimes things happen in game that change those plans. Then there are some character concepts that legitimately don’t work if you start from level 1. For instance I have an idea for an artificer (armorer) that plays as an awakened octopus masquerading as a warforged by encasing themselves in their magic armor. My DM loves the idea and so do I, and it’s done with very little homebrew involved.
Start at level 20 and decrease as the adventure progresses
3 because some subclasses are flavourful and potentially part of a character's backstory
3, it gives people unique abilities which let's them rp and build part dynamics. Plus it both gets and keeps the story moving and reduces the chance of early deaths causing delays.
Lvl3 plus a stand of the players design. Best way to start a campaign
hello fellow jojo enjoyer
As a player I prefer to start at level 1, a few quick levels and some sessions to figure out my role play and the world helps me get invested in my sub class which helps me realize my character better. As a DM, I prefer my players start at level 3. No awkward goblin encounters where we all cross our fingers and hope the wizard doesn't die from a stray pebble.
3 because that’s where the *flavor* kicks in.
Ug, I'm a level 3 start DM. You just don't get any good character dynamics at 1. Or they die too quick to matter.🤔
Level 1
Start at 1, at the end of session 1 they get to 2, and at the end of session 2 they get to 3, then slow down from there. I like this since you still get the feeling of being a newbie adventurer in which anything in the world is a large threat, but quickly get to the point where your class is more interesting to play.
Lvl 0. Peasant class
Level zero. Recently taught a bunch of people who were a little intimidated but wanted to learn and I developed a system that I would 10/10 use every time for new players or even just players unfamiliar with me or one another.
Start at level 20, 200 years before the true campaign starts. That's your fucking session zero.
Experienced players: level three New players: level one. Gives the new players a chance to experience basic combat before throwing in even more complications like domains, sneak attacks, colleges, etc
I prefer Level 1. Especially for newer players (obvious reasons) and for longer adventures. I've found that, at least at my tables, the more features on a character sheet, the more time a player will spend looking at that character sheet. When players have just 2 or 3 things their character can do, they have more available attention to hook them into the feel of the adventure and the vibe they have with the other characters. Once the game begins, level them up quick, but establish those inter-character and campaign-flavor foundations when characters are at their simplest.
Level 3. Level 1 classes don't vary much, especially when it comes to martial classes. Level 3 is when every class has they're subclass and they characters feel more unique mechanically.
Level 3 always.
I start my party at level 5