Level 1 Start

[Swift]

Changing the starting level would be great for those who profit from the deaths of others.

After all, level 3s generally have more wealth than level 1s, and I presume we would adjust accordingly.

Corpses are suddenly worth twice what they used to be. I can already hear Creslyn rejoicing beneath his mountain of peanuts

[Veilan]

With all the serious heated philosophical disagreement I'm dealing out, let me also throw a more light-hearted angle at this:

Progression in ALFA stops at 210,000 xp for everyone. Why would anyone want to cut their journey short by 3,000 of that?

[fluffmonster]

What is IC about assuming you are tougher than you actually are?
If people feel adventurous anyway and want to take their chances, that's great! That's the stuff stories begin with. Some of them will come out stronger out of that fight, emboldened and more experienced, and on top of it, having gleaned more of the valuable IC knowledge about how dangerous an orc is. Others will end up orc-roast. It's natural selection, and not every farmer who thinks his pops' olde sword makes him a hero will actually live to be one.

Here we get to the heart of the con argument, don't we; the belief that if you don't survive the wheel of life and death, your PC was never good enough in the first place. If you want to live, you either have to start your adventuring career by *not* adventuring and playing it safe, or you are expected to do what amounts to some amount of power-gaming your PC to better your level 1 odds. This isn't selecting for roleplaying; this is selecting for build optimization, twitch skills and just plain blind luck. To the extent that our membership is 'elite', are we looking for elite roleplayers, or elite videogamers? Higher starting level is described as a sop to narrativism, but how can we say we value RP at all without it? In fact, it rather seems that the proper advice to give players in your mind would be to make throw-away PCs and don't worry about story or RP until it has survived a while. Is that really what we want to start telling people?

Every PC will have to weigh their capabilities against potential foes, this is irrelevant to the matter. Where level 1 is special is that their capabilities, even in a party, are bound from below; Everything is equivalent or more often superior and capable of 1-hit kills on the average level 1 PC.

[oldgrayrogue]

Amen Fluff. The "reality" is that all of that 3000 XP initially formative and essential, not to mention incredibly valuable RP you get starting at Level 1 is crammed (for many players) into a few hours or a day, or spent RPing in a tavern for a few days of RPXP script because they are OOC afraid to leave town. And as I said previously, it becomes a balance issue, because the players who are "experiencing" that level 1-3 formative RP, who fight the orc solo bc it is IC and burn three CLW potions in the process, over several months or more are then surrounded by a bunch of level 6 PCs with a ton more wealth because they OOC "played it safe" or ground it out. In a perfect world no one would do this. But that denies reality, and I don't think the reason its done is because they are PGers, or powerbuilders or whatever. Like Fluff aptly explained, the system provides incentives to make a powerbuild, and right off the bat start thinking OOC if you want to survive. I want (and think we all want) the incentive to be on the story, whether you survive or not. But a story that doesn't really begin, or at least not in earnest, until the paranoia of a one hit unlucky death is passed (which again creates the OOC/META incentive to get past that point for some as quickly as possible) or worse ends before it even begins, is just a crappy initial experience IMO. I want players, especially new players, to have a great initial experience that hooks them into the server and makes them feel like they want to keep logging in to continue the great story they just commenced. And by great experience I don't mean tons of phat loot and XP, but a good and diverse story based experience.

I think a start at level 2 or 3 does a great deal to obviate all of the negatives, remove the incentives for OOC thinking, and get people RPing their story immediately without any OOC cross-over. At level 3 people do not suddenly transform into invincible spawn farming powergamers and stop RPing. They are just able to experience and enjoy more of the wonderful gameworld at their disposal without OOC paranoia, with more options for story development, but still with the VERY REAL risk of a permanent, and hopefully meaningful death.

[Ithildur]

I'm not keen on changing core/pillar elements let me say that first; a year ago I would've vehemently opposed raising the starting lvl. But after some recent consideration and reading some of the above 2 posts I'm inclined to say I could see supporting a lvl 2 start for SOME PCs on an application basis, similar to how we monitor and limit ECL/extraordinary PCs via application.

In addition to the points the above posts bring up, some concepts really make more sense with lvl 2 starts, especially hybrid/multiclass concepts like fighter/mages, an iconic archetype going back to days of Red Box Basic DnD (when Elf was a class and they were always ftr/mages) to 2 edition. You can approximate a fighter/cleric, say, with a lvl 1 cleric who melees a lot; it's a viable option. You can't do that with a lvl 1 wizard pretending to be a ftr/wiz (not for long at least). You can pretend that your ftr1 has some basic theoretical training in the arcane, hasn't actually been able to cast spells yet (which is what I'm doing currently), but it's a bit of a stretch to call him a ftr/wiz.

Same with ftr/rogue concepts, though not to the same extent perhaps, and a swashbuckler can fit the bill for certain concepts of a clever, sneaky/finesse-y swashbuckling warrior (interestingly enough these kinds of hybrid base classes came out with later 3.5e books, swashes in CW and duskblades in PHB2. Sadly nwn2 added swashes but no duskblades, though EK is available as a PRC).

Aside from earlier editions allowing you two start effectively with two full classes active, there's also gestalt rules for 3.5e. Arguably a tough online campaign in a real time engine might really be a very sensible place to use gestalt characters.

Regardless, lvl 1 start is not a hard and fast rule in Core 3.5e pnp; what we DO want to avoid is something that often happens when you start a campaign at lvl 7+ where characters can often feel more like a collection of feats, abilities, magic items, etc optimally assembled to be monster killers more so than organic characters with history going back to when they were ordinary mortals.

At lvl 2, characters are still very much ordinary mortals. It's not like starting a campaign with artificially built up lvl 16's. Still plenty of time to develop history, be scared of low CR mobs and challenges, etc. for a long long time to come. If we make it an application basis so that there's some moderation in order to prevent unproven players who are looking for nothing but a freebie boost to powergame from being able to obtain this, I think this may be a viable option for ALFA.

On the other hand, a lvl 3 start I would absolutely oppose. The gulf between a lvl 1 and a lvl 3 is simply too huge, compared to the gap between a lvl 1 and lvl 2.

[hollyfant]

I s'pose everyone with an opinion has vented it by now, so the next question is: are the admins going to implement something / test something / put a specific proposal up for a vote?

[CloudDancing]

Fact: It takes less than two hours in Rivermoot or the Mage College or two-three patrols to attain level 2.

Fact: If you start your PC elsewhere, too bad.

Fact: As a test I watched a PC level under this premise. Nothing happened. When the XP was removed, they were still nearly level 3 in two days of game play.

Thoughts:
So does that mean we should pull all our content on TSM because it is "not fair" to BG players where statics no longer function at all? It is basically giving players an unfair advantage over others, so that TSM PC in a short time pretty much gain level two and three while BG players wait for Dms?

So I say DM granted 1001 XP reward for a completed bio, not a free level up. This requring of course you have to touch base with a DM and be checked over before released into the wild.

[Blindhamsterman]

the Idea Cloud has, has from the start been the best concept for this IMO, a DM given exp bonus for a well written and thought out Bio, it's probably also fair to give a percentage of it for a Bio that isn't quite up to scratch, while the full amount goes to someone that has taken a lot of time to think out and flesh out their back story.

[Mirabai]

I really don't see the point in the hoop. I can write a solid bio in 30 minutes. Just give them level 2 if they want it.

[Blindhamsterman]

Indeed, but many people don't write one, or don't until they hit 4th level or otherwise deem themselves to be 'survivable'. I'd consider it less of a hoop and more of an effort to get folk to think more about their backstory etc early on, currently those that do, often feel annoyed and or cheated if the concept thet spent so long working on gets KOd by an unlucky critical from that kobold with a dagger or sling.

[Rotku]

I s'pose everyone with an opinion has vented it by now, so the next question is: are the admins going to implement something / test something / put a specific proposal up for a vote?

We're discussing it. Obviously there is as much disagreement within the admin ranks than without.

[Magile]

Indeed, but many people don't write one, or don't until they hit 4th level or otherwise deem themselves to be 'survivable'. I'd consider it less of a hoop and more of an effort to get folk to think more about their backstory etc early on, currently those that do, often feel annoyed and or cheated if the concept thet spent so long working on gets KOd by an unlucky critical from that kobold with a dagger or sling.

Retired a PC recently (was created shortly before Vendrin's Exalted campaign, which means around November, 2008. Ended up 1,000xp shy of level 7, decent gear, etc) and made a new PC on Sunday, August 29th, 2010. I had a background written up for him before I even created him on a server, and he reached level two on Wednesday, September 1st, 2010 late evening.

It's server dependent (obviously), but a mix of some statics, some small DM events and some RPXP is all it took -- and nothing was ever soloed. I used the time of doing the RP and statics to have my PC become familiar with the TSM server IC by having another PC act as his guide. I don't think I would've appreciated him as much as I do now if I had to start at level 2 or level 3. This concept, just to add further information, is based on a multiclass concept that will occur at the third level -- in fact, the experience up to the third level is what's making it just as thrilling, and I even went over the concept with an HDM and some folks in standards to see if the route I was going was an appropriate manner (I also believe my PC will be the first under this concept, wee~!).

Anyway, not making an argument for or against anything -- just giving information from a long[est] standing ALFAn who very recently started fresh and has experienced the ever-dreaded level 1 start with a PC. The concept and bio had been worked on long before the character was even created, was submitted shortly after creation, and the concept was a multiclass concept that was not deterred/ruined because of a level 1 start. Use this information as something for or against it -- as far as I can feel, to me it's a moot issue.

[This all took place on TSM]

[Blindhamsterman]

Good informant post Mags, actually does make my words above rather moot .

And yes, on TSM it is rather easy to hit 2nd in a day or so if involved in some DM stuff a few statics and timed exp. BG it's quite the opposite, but that'll probably change once theres a little static content to do also. (I to played a Multiclass concept, going with it at 1st and RPing some of the skills (along with taking appropiate skills etc) to fit the latter class I planned to take.

I guess, in fairness it doesn't matter a whole lot either way, the bonus exp will help some, feel rather pointless to others, and be irrelivant to more. I do think that even if we did decide to have a level 2 start (or bonus exp) it should be optional, so that those that do not desire such a thing, are free to play on as is.

[Ksiel]

Some feed back from maybe the 2nd longest ALFA member. Magile, are you sure you own that longest ALFAN title? None the less, on to the main point.

Level 2 start opens quite a bit for back stories for players, and those who have a busy RL to tend with, not having to spend the time running through the same statics they ran through on their previous pc's just to get to level 2 so that they can RP the type of pc they want is not taking anything away from ALFA.

I have seen the arguments on both sides, but no matter how you look at it, more hp helps the survivability of a pc. It is simply the numbers. If someone is willing to submit a great bio that a dm agrees deserves a level 2 start, by all means go for it. I for one trust our DM's to do what is right.

[Veilan]

Why worry about longer backstories opened up by level 2? We're here to experience stories, live, and in game... we're not in some kind of creative writing competition. The more of your characters story you can develop in game, the better, no?

Also, I'm a member on these boards longer than you both!