StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I've played through computer versions of Dungeons and Dragons and such, Neverwinter Nights, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate and a few others, but until very recently I haven't touched the game they all came from: pen-and-paper Dungeons and Dragons.

I've been wondering: who here likes playing pen-and-paper D&D with a low-level character? I do, in a way. Although I just love watching the world burn with a high-level character in the computer games, there's something about playing as a low-level character in the pen-and-paper game that just forces me to be creative. I don't know, I guess maybe it's just that when our characters are all just a group of low-level nobodies with a few shoddy weapons, the packs on our backs and what we can scrounge together, we tend to focus more on the dialogue and roleplay of the story instead of pitting our characters' statistics against whatever the DM decides to pit them against, and I like that better. It makes the game seem less 'mechanical' and more alive, although there's a lot of appeal in reaching the higher levels. But I don't like that, I'm afraid it'll start becoming like one of those MMORPG grindfests without the pretty graphics. Much as I'd like to get up there to the big levels, sometimes I just feel like it's not going to be worth it in the end or become a detriment to the story itself.

Since I realized that I've been wondering if anyone else shares my views and/or likes Dungeons and Dragons like that, with a low level character. Well, as always, I'm open to other peoples' views and opinions.

Most of the games I've played have tended to start out at 3rd level. The highest I've ever reached is 8th level. I'm inclined to concur that lower level characters have to think a bit more about their tactics.

I don't like 1st or 2nd level though, not at all; options are just too limited.

I don't terribly like being low powered.

What I like is being high powered but not so much that you dominate the setting. That's when the fun really starts. I can get behind playing a low powered game, like Delta Green or low level D&D, but only for one-shots and horror games. Low power levels lend themselves very well to those, anyhow.

Epic quests should, IMO, left in the realm of epic heroes.

If you're talking D&D, in my experience many classes are barely playable until level 3-5. As U235 says, who wants to be the mage with two whole spells?

I mean, who wants to play fucking D&D anyway, but not everyone can have taste. Needs more mastubatory bullshit.

I started at level one and worked my way up to level five, and yes, I'll agree that having a piss-poor character is kinda boring, although going to the other extreme I don't like. Sorry if I didn't make that clearer in the first post.

What I like is being high powered but not so much that you dominate the setting. That's when the fun really starts.

I guess this is a good way to put it. When things are always epic and I'm controlling a character that always deals with things at that level, it starts to get mundane. Sometimes it's nice to leave epic the way it is, that way it still seems epic when you look at it later on up the road.

To be honest, anything works if the game is played to that level: being high-level simply requires that the game allow players to do high-level stuff. It's lametarded when your cretin of a GM has a team doing the same shit as they were before when they're invincible superheroes. Oh, now you fight BLACK orcs, wow for level scaling!

However since 99% of all RPG players play simply to get rid of that feeling of failure and impotence that haunts them like the bold brave world outside their parent's basement, it's usually intentional. I'LL USE MY BROADSWORD LOL I WIN.

Stark wrote:To be honest, anything works if the game is played to that level: being high-level simply requires that the game allow players to do high-level stuff. It's lametarded when your cretin of a GM has a team doing the same shit as they were before when they're invincible superheroes. Oh, now you fight BLACK orcs, wow for level scaling!

This should be duct taped in every section of a RPG that talks about GMing. Ever. Level scaling is for MMORPGs and times where you want to forget about all that other nonsense and just hack some Orcs to bits.

Yeah, you can play a fun game where everyone is janitors, or where everyone is Sorcerer Supreme of hte Super Sorcerer Club. It just means you can't use 'go into dungeon to get a chalice from goblins' stuff when your team can shift mountains, you have to actually adapt your campaign to the players capabilities, or it's as retarded as Superman stopping bank robberies.

I also liked the 6-10 levels the most. You start being able to kick the asses of things worth attacking, but you're not yet so lofty that you shit marble. You could easily make a game where you're all minor Dieties and do amazing things, but the widest variety of gameplay inspiration comes from things like Lord of the Rings, freakin' Harry Potter, Dragonheart, and so on. Movies, games, books, and so on of the mainstream where characters can fight big bad things only as part of a team or with the aid of some amazing artifact. Also, humans themselves are not so durable they withstand the impacts of tank shells with only some aggrivated bleeding. Higher level character jsut seem ridiculous with the amount of punishment they ignore.

So while it was nonsensical at level 5, it's totally ridiculously stupid by the time you hit 14. You end up fighting things you don't really care about, and that you only know about because you had to look them up. It's like a lot of things, where you're fighting--as mentioned--Black Orcs now instead of normal ones. Well, where were the Black Orcs before? Why weren't they common? And why are we fighting so many now?

Not really because a good gamemaster can make any level interesting. Low level seems more fun because scenarios are easy to make real challenges.

GMs who make high level boring are so because they can't think of using something more then "Instead of 10 Goblins, it's a 10000000!".

Low level makes things more interesting, and low level allows you to throw some-what realistic encounters your way. Storm the castle, clear the duegon, overthrow the Kingdom, win the war, whatever you like.

High end on the other hand, everything has to be saving the world. I personally HATE saving the world. @$#2 the world, I don't need that kind of pressure, besides how often is the bloody world in that great a danger?

But that's the problem, a 9th Level Sorcerer is some-what powerful, he can do a fight or two each day and keep on going. He certainly can fight the party tank one on one and hold his own. But at level 18 that same Sorcerer can wipe the floor with any tank. He makes reality his bitch every Tuesday just after tea. Finding a reason why that level 18 Sorcerer can't simply Wish the problem away is hard.

And is the issue, once your past the 15th level most classes can ni-infinite numbers of level 4 or below. At 15th level everyone is the Hulk and Superman, and Ironman rolled into one. It's a big issue for making enjoyable campaigns at that level. In a sense your constantly hemmed in because most of your encounters must be epic enough least your party simply rewrite reality to find the lost King's son, or find which fucking castle the fucking Princess is in, so they don't have to fucking go to another fucking Castle. Fucking Peach.

You get the idea.

If you're in it for the long haul, there's nothing quite as satisfying as taking a character from first level to high level. This assumes that the campaign operates at a sane (i.e. non-Monty Haul) pace; if you're levelling up after each adventure, there's something wrong.

Mr Bean wrote:But that's the problem, a 9th Level Sorcerer is some-what powerful, he can do a fight or two each day and keep on going. He certainly can fight the party tank one on one and hold his own. But at level 18 that same Sorcerer can wipe the floor with any tank. He makes reality his bitch every Tuesday just after tea. Finding a reason why that level 18 Sorcerer can't simply Wish the problem away is hard.

This is the problem that magic users present. At, say, fifth level the MU must be protected at all times, and brought out only when needed to fling that fireball (or whatever). Surviving to even that modest level is unlikely at best. But as you say, the 18th level archmage doesn't really need anyone else.

Mr Bean wrote:
And is the issue, once your past the 15th level most classes can ni-infinite numbers of level 4 or below. At 15th level everyone is the Hulk and Superman, and Ironman rolled into one. It's a big issue for making enjoyable campaigns at that level. In a sense your constantly hemmed in because most of your encounters must be epic enough least your party simply rewrite reality to find the lost King's son, or find which fucking castle the fucking Princess is in, so they don't have to fucking go to another fucking Castle. Fucking Peach.

You get the idea.

So? Have the villain steal her away in the multiverse after stealing the powers of the gods themselves . Super Mario Galaxies is awesome .

Personally, I much prefer high-level if not epic play, but that's just my play-style.

Y'know, as much as people might call me elitist for saying this, I've never had someone say 'I prefer high-level or epic play' and not instantly nodded and said 'yeah, I fucking bet you do' with eyes rolling out of my head. Having said something like that, I've never known anyone to turn out to be a mature, nuanced player: they're always the sort of people I played with in highschool.

Please note I've already demonstrated I have no problem with high-level play, so I'd like to head off all the pathetic strawman attacks now.

You know I always thought that the kids that played D&D to be snobbish. They never wanted to let anyone new to the game join them. Or at least that was the way it seemed at my school. Later I could understand why, since most everyone teased them about it, but at the younger age when there was no teasing it just seemed like they were jerks.

Death from the Sea wrote:You know I always thought that the kids that played D&D to be snobbish. They never wanted to let anyone new to the game join them. Or at least that was the way it seemed at my school. Later I could understand why, since most everyone teased them about it, but at the younger age when there was no teasing it just seemed like they were jerks.

It's a defensive move on their part, most people are sarcastic when they ask. Doesn't make it okay to act like an ass, though.

I found the best way to respond was to roll with it and then start describing the idea of the game and then how to play, they expect you to not respond, it takes them off guard, then they either leave or stay and listen.

Stark wrote:Y'know, as much as people might call me elitist for saying this, I've never had someone say 'I prefer high-level or epic play' and not instantly nodded and said 'yeah, I fucking bet you do' with eyes rolling out of my head. Having said something like that, I've never known anyone to turn out to be a mature, nuanced player: they're always the sort of people I played with in highschool.

Well, in the end, a bit of a non-reality power trip is sometimes refreshing.

Also, there are mature, nuanced players, they're just amazingly rare.

MJ12 Commando wrote:Well, in the end, a bit of a non-reality power trip is sometimes refreshing.

Also, there are mature, nuanced players, they're just amazingly rare.

Roleplaying is like Counterstrike. The massive preponderance of idiots makes it virtually impossible for non-idiots to even penetrate. Playing with friends is reasonably accessible (depending on the particular arcane, poorly-thought out ruleset used) but as soon as you try to play 'other people' it's a terrifying adventure in spam, whinging and whorage.

I'd like to clarify my statement: I am not saying I played with 'mature, nuanced' people in highschool - quite the opposite. I've met maybe a dozen decent RPG players in my entire life: it's why I don't play RPGs anymore.

D&D players are exclusionist because they're almost certainly playing a twisted subset of the real rules with a bunch of houserules (which is 100% normal and how all functional human beings make sense out of the piles of shit most engines are). It's just that most of the time, those rules exist to create the kind of atmosphere they like, and it's extremely unlikely new players would maintain the delicate balance between their idea of 'fun' and their idea of 'crunch'. Adding a new player to a campaign - except in extremely vanilla-rules situations - is often a great way to ruin the campaign. Overall RP noobs are usually fine to add in this way, but anyone with 'experience' or who 'knows the rules' can kill a campaign and group easily.

Stark wrote:If you're talking D&D, in my experience many classes are barely playable until level 3-5. As U235 says, who wants to be the mage with two whole spells?

I mean, who wants to play fucking D&D anyway, but not everyone can have taste. Needs more mastubatory bullshit.

Hey, Stark?

Fuck off.

DnD is a pretty damn good game when you've got a decent group of people you normally play with, especially when they're all decent or better roleplayers. Sure, the system is shitty, but it produces some classic moments.

Furthermore, not everyone decides that the house rules should further an atmosphere rather than clarifying hazy rules.

In conclusion.

Fuck off.

I love people like this. Oh noes, I said something mean about D&D! I mean, he admits it's shit, but he loves it and is thus offended!

If you don't like the rules but use them anyway, that sounds like a personal problem. A really FUNNY personal problem.

Stark the best part is how offended he is, by you, Stark Hater of all things Good and True(TM)
Stark, kicker of puppies and destroyer of sunshine.

FYI:I feel compelled to link to this, Joe Wood, the Commoner Campaign.
Linky Here
Proof that with a good DM and a halfway decent player even a Level 1 Commoner can have a interesting story. Close to 100,000 views and over a thousand posts it's the longest running thread on the main Wizard's board.

Mr Bean, I thought 'commoners' in D&D were 'level 0' dudes? I'll have to have a look at your link.

Like you say, a good GM can made gold out of shit (one could cynically say such a skill is necessary in the RPG industry) and the games I've found most enjoyable have been all up and down the power spectrum. It's just so hard to get that perfect storm of non-idiots and a good, flexible idea.

Stark, I love you in this thread so much. If you were in Adelaide I'd offer you sex right now. But you're not, so nyah.


Personally I've always liked the mid-levels. Level 5 or 6, I find, is powerful enough that you can put a few adventures in your backstory, which I quite like. Starting at level 1, I find, makes it difficult for me to say, "I spent several years fighting in the Crusades at Aquinoch." At least if you start at mid levels and still want to be a farmboy, you can just claim to be an exceptionally gifted farmboy. It's harder to explain away going to war and not even getting to level 2.

Once you get to the uber high levels, it gets a bit boring, but then again, the most fun I ever had in a game was when I was playing Nobilis. We were all quite deliciously evil - my character, for example, was Sony middle management before he became a god. Then afterwards, he continued to act like Sony middle management, except with godlike powers over bureaucracy. Our people hated us so much.

Davey wrote:I've been wondering: who here likes playing pen-and-paper D&D with a low-level character?

Ah, pen and paper... you know, when I started playing D&D that's all we had. If I recall, the home computer didn't come along until a couple years later.

In all the role-playing games, both pen and paper and on-line, I have a certain fondness for the lowest levels. All the different levels have different "feel" and attractions. I feel fortunate I can truly say I enjoy all levels of those games.