starting high.

[AxeMental]

In all my years of playing AD&D I have always fought the idea of starting PCs at higher levels (say 9th or 10th) because I felt it was cutting too much out of the history of the PC. Then I realized that at about 10-12th I loose interest in my most favorite PCs. Like some 35 year old pro-football player they become over-imbossed in my head, any failing in strategy or in roles is a major disaster; gone forever are the moments of spontinaity, there too familiar and too immortalized to be much fun to play. I used to think it was due to complexity, but thats not it, and its not being afraid to loose them either. They just loose that freshness and turn into stale machines.

Anyway, thinking back to who were my favorite high level PCs, I would have to say they were those I roled up for high level modules at times when I didn't have one. For instance I roled up a 12th level ranger and played it on a mega adventure my brother made up in highschool, epic in nature. At the end it was down to my ranger and a small handful of the original 3 dozen that started (ranging from 3rd to 15th) against a mega anti-paladin. After this battle was over and I was one of the survivors I really wanted to continue playing this guy, but was not allowed to by the DM as it wasn't really my character, hadn't gone through all that one goes through to develop it's high level persona. It felt more like a freshman college super star then a hardened pro-football QB. Yet that experiance is what seems to be missing from my high level PCs. Now, when I think about it, starting out already high level pcs was actually a practise going back to the old days. The original modules (esp. turnies) offered PCs to assume, and if I remember correctly, it was sometimes advised to role up PCs of that level if those offered didn't appeal to you.

So, the question is, do you think it might be cool to start playing (assuming your with experianced players) at level 10 instead of level 1 for a year or two? Just make up a brief history, and for once enjoy playing a high level PC with the freshness that has always been absent. If you think about it Leg. Adventures does it this way. A starting character has the HP and experiance of an equiv. 5-7th level AD&D player. Adventures are assumed to have already experianced a ton of stuff that has made them exceptional. Even in AD&D there is a period of training assumed to have occured between 0-1 that might have been somewhat exciting, esp. for thieves and assassins.

Well, let me know what you think of this idea. If anything, it might actually make playing your old stale high level PCs more fun, get you to take them out of retirement...possibly bring a new life back to the game. Or does this concept go against something foundational to the game?

[foster1941]

I'm attached to the idea of starting characters at 1st and working them all the way up since characters created 'new' at high level tend to lack the depth of characters of the same level who've actually been played all the way up, plus players who 'jump in at the deep end' tend to not really have sufficient understanding of their character's capabilities to really play them effectively (especially for spell casters). But, that said I realize that not everyone has a year or two of regular play to devote to getting a character up to 10th level and there's no reason they should be denied that aspect of play.

Some parts of creating a 'new' high level character are easy -- the rulebook tells you right there how many hp you have, how many spells you have, what special abilities you have, etc. (unlike something like 3E or RuneQuest where you have to 'build' the character from the ground up, which can take forever). But there are a few snags -- 1) ability scores: how do you determine these for a high level character? None of the by-the-book methods really work because it's generally assumed that to have gotten to such a high level the character probably has pretty good scores (not to mention the possibility that some of them may have been raised through 'previous adventures'); perhaps a 'point-buy' system with a baseline around 14? 2) magic items: a high level character almost certainly has an arsenal of magic items, but how do you determine which ones? The 'creating a party on the spur of the moment' system in the DMG attempts to address this, but as anyone who's ever used that system can attest characters tend to come out vastly underpowered compared to 'real' characters of equivalent level; 3) dual-classing: if 'new' high-level characters are allowed to have dual-classed they will invariably be overpowered compared to 'real' characters, because the 'downside' of dual-classing (i.e. having to start over at 1st level when everyone else is at higher levels) has been removed and they can 'game' the advantages. A newly-created high level character should NEVER be allowed to be dual-classed.

But once you've dealt with all of those, sure, go ahead and create new high-level characters. It's unrealistic in this day and age to think that everyone's going to follow the original campaign model (i.e. ~20 players playing in various combinations over the course of a couple-three years) so unless you're satisfied always playing low level characters sooner or later you're going to have to create some high level ones. RuneQuest and LA characters start out in power equivalent to a D&D character of about 5th or 6th level, heck DJ/Mythus starting characters are equivalent to about 10th level D&D characters!

[northrundicandus]

foster1941 said:

RuneQuest and LA characters start out in power equivalent to a D&D character of about 5th or 6th level, heck DJ/Mythus starting characters are equivalent to about 10th level D&D characters!

5th Edition Stormbringer PCs are pretty powerful too. Probably equivalent to a 7th level AD&D character - at least the fighter and thief types. My AD&D players really like the fact that you don't start out as a weakling.

Call of Cthulhu seems to be only game bucking this tend. Of course, no matter how 'good' your PC is, you're going to die, go insane, or get pulled out of the game. So I guess CoC 'Power Creep' is moot. ;-)

[northrundicandus]

A module like C1 I think has the best guidelines as to how start PCs at higher levels - give the party a big pile of gold and a sheet with magic items and prices on it. They then decide as a group what they have.

I agree with Foster about the DMG method of magic-item assignment for players starting above 1st level tends to make some pretty weak characters.

By the Book AD&D doesn't work very well if you are too stingy with the magic.

Doh! I meant C2!

[PapersAndPaychecks]

I must admit to being a fan of high-level AD&D. I do enjoy playing at 10th-12th level or even higher.

One way of rolling stats for high level characters is to use Method V (from Unearthed Arcana). Let magic-users roll to understand any spells they wish to have up to the highest level they can cast; give them 1d6 of the highest-level spells they can cast in their spellbook, determined randomly.

If you allow the players to "buy" (say) 100,000gp worth of magic items from the back of the DMG, which is a good solution to the problem of magic item allocation, then you do need to adjust the prices of certain items. For example, Girdles of Giant Strength are too cheap. You should also ban artifacts, relics and hammers of thunderbolts; personally I also ban holy avengers, vorpal swords, and anything which enables a character to cast wish.

[AxeMental]

Foster: "But once you've dealt with all of those, sure, go ahead and create new high-level characters. It's unrealistic in this day and age to think that everyone's going to follow the original campaign "

Maybe its just me, but I really tend to want to retire my high level guys and start fresh. I just wonder if its worth sacrificing going through the ropes to get a PC I want to play 10-20th.

[northrundicandus]

PapersAndPaychecks said:

I

If you allow the players to "buy" (say) 100,000gp worth of magic items from the back of the DMG, which is a good solution to the problem of magic item allocation, then you do need to adjust the prices of certain items. For example, Girdles of Giant Strength are too cheap. You should also ban artifacts, relics and hammers of thunderbolts; personally I also ban holy avengers, vorpal swords, and anything which enables a character to cast wish.

That's why it should be a predetermined list, with adjusted prices, like C2, rather than just giving the players the DMG charts. ;-)

[northrundicandus]

AxeMental said:

Maybe its just me, but I really tend to want to retire my high level guys and start fresh. I just wonder if its worth sacrificing going through the ropes to get a PC I want to play 10-20th.

Man - high level AD&D is where it is at. As P&P has illuminated in the past, the game really becomes a massive strategy chess game at this point. Luck becomes less of a factor in your PC's survival, and your own planning, forethought, and decision-making skills determine whether you live or die.

However, as Foster has said, it is very hard to effectively play a high level character if you've not played them from weak babes all the way to name level or higher. You just don't know them or their items well enough.

[PapersAndPaychecks]

Having said that, there's a very large group of players who prefer to play AD&D at lower level. Whenever I ask (on the web) what kind of scenarios people want, the feedback I get is to provide lowbie adventures every time.

I wonder whether Northrundicandus and I are in the minority, preferring the higher-level stuff...

[Jerry Mapes]

low or high, doesnt really matter to me anymore. I still love to take a 1st level goob and run him up thru the levels but after all these years my PC portfolio has enough characters to choose from regardless of the level range someone wants to start at. Granted its not over flowing but i have at least 3 or 4 characters in each of the 1-4, 5-8, 9-10, 11-14, 15-20 level ranges, all which have came up from a level 1 goob. I still dislike cold rolling any character to play that is over 5th level. Its like a kid being born at age 14 instead of of like normal. All the initial formative years are missed, even if you are good at comeing up with detailed back story.

Jerry

[AxeMental]

Man, I have never had a PC reach over 14th and that guy is retired. That took 15 years of on and off playing too. Thats the problem I have maybe, too few high levelers, and too much at stake. Also, our other players don't have PCs any where near that high. I dislike the idea of them assuming premade personalities, but to allow them to make it up completely...well that could be cool.

Anyhow, I don't have the first clue how to design a decent 17th level module. It's not like you can fill it with trolls and orcs. And so many of the really powerful mosnters are rare and unique. Perhaps this coming weekend I'll role up some high level bad a$$ and tell you how it goes. So what is a good high level module for say 3 players? And which are sucky so I know what too avoid at all costs. I know I asked this some time back at some plae, but if you could list these again. Thanks.

[PapersAndPaychecks]

A high level module from the published range of adventures for 3 players? Definitely Tomb of Horrors.

Designing a high level module is easier than designing a low level module, apart from the encounters. For example, there are only two kinds of traps: death (save at -4 to avoid) and death (no save.) Easy.

For the encounters, open your Monster Manual, look at the "Number Appearing" stat and assign the maximum. Then find a way to put the players at a disadvantage during the encounter.

So, for example, the book says you get 2-16 wights. So as a DM, you put 16 wights in a room and then make that room an evil temple where the wights are immune to turning.

You get 1-4 vampires; so as a DM, you put 3 or 4 vampires in a room and make them all former PC's.

Liches are good.

[foster1941]

For characters in the level 10-14 range both D3: Vault of the Drow and S1: Tomb of Horrors are very good. S3: Expedition to the Barrier Peaks claims it's for levels 9-12 but I suspect characters up to 14th level could still be challenged by it (especially a relatively small party, like 3 players). Q1: Queen of the Demonweb Pits isn't very good IMO. For characters of levels 15+ there's not much. WG6: Isle of the Ape claims to be for such characters but IMO it's not really very good -- lots of combat with huge numbers of monsters (and huge monsters) and little else -- by toning down the encounter frequency, numbers appearing, and a nasty collateral effect (the jungle environment causes the characters' equipment to gradually disintegrate) this module might as well be for mid-level characters. There's also the H series (H1: Bloodstone Pass, H2: The Mines of Bloodstone, H3: Bloodstone Wars, and H4: The Throne of Bloodstone) for level 15+ characters, but those are all crap. One of Mayfair's RoleAids modules (Lich Lords) claims to be for high level characters (levels 12-16 IIRC), but I don't have it and don't know if it's any good or not.

[AxeMental]

Thanks Foster.