PC dies - New PC starting level?

[Zulgyan]

Ok, common situation: a PC dies.

What level do you grant to the new character if the rest of the characters are already high level?

at 4th lvl?
at 7th lvl?
at 9th lvl?
at 12 lvl?
etc.

Personally, I go for around 2 lvls lower than the lowest level character.

This level differences increases at higher levels. Because, for example, a 14 lvl wiz can adventure with a 9 lvl warrior quite well. But not to well in a level 5 vs. level 1 situation.

[makofan]

I dunno - I usually go in for TPK's

[WSmith]

If your PC dies, make life simple and go buy a Mac.

(crickets chirping)

Usually first, but there is a posting here that has a good method for creating pre-experienced characters.

[wulfgar]

First level. I can speak from personal experience as a player in this regard. I joined a group where the others pcs were already 3rd level. My first level pc's kept dying and dying, but when one finally made it to 2nd it felt like a great accomplishment and that character survived for the rest of the campaign. This was in a AD&D2 game, but i think it applies to OD&D as well. The real and constant threat of pc death is what makes an adventure exciting and success rewarding. There has to risk of death and severe consequences when it happens. If you get to start back up without going down to 0 xp, then you cheapen the risks.

[Zulgyan]

A 1st level can certainly adventure with a 3rd level party.

But what about a 1st level with a 5th level party?

He almost has no chance at all of survival.

[badger2305]

wulfgar said:

First level. I can speak from personal experience as a player in this regard. I joined a group where the others pcs were already 3rd level. My first level pc's kept dying and dying, but when one finally made it to 2nd it felt like a great accomplishment and that character survived for the rest of the campaign. This was in a AD&D2 game, but i think it applies to OD&D as well. The real and constant threat of pc death is what makes an adventure exciting and success rewarding. There has to risk of death and severe consequences when it happens. If you get to start back up without going down to 0 xp, then you cheapen the risks.

I agree with you 110%.

One of the biggest problems I've seen with later editions of D&D, particularly 3.14159ed., is that generating characters takes so long that players get overly invested in their characters from the very beginning. So character death is seen as a hindrance to game play, rather than as a part of it.

There's also another issue that if it takes a long time to generate a character, there's less room for that character to develop and mature over time. Sometimes the character you roll up changes and becomes a different person than you first imagined him or her, as you go adventuring. That's a good thing, or so I would think. The strength of OD&D in this regard is the lack of excessive detail at the beginning; roll some dice and let's keep going!

[sham]

I normally have one or two NPC's/Henchmen/Retainers that are higher than level one at that point, and often allow the player in question the opportunity of 'taking over' one of these characters.

Short of this, I will normally allow a new PC to join up at *around* level minus two. I take into account the class experience requirements, and other factors before deciding.

They often join up by being freed or found in the dungeon, though. Injured, 'nekkid', flat broke, etc.

Joining a party of level 6 and 7 adventurers, hardened by years of dungeon delving, with a level 1 PC is suicidal. I doubt in reality that said party would ever subject an adventurer still wet behind the ears to such danger. This has always been a tough decision for me.

[wulfgar]

I think depending on your style of DMing, this situation may not ever come up. If you are running deadly dungeons where characters die on a (at least) semi-regular basis, then you won't have everyone in the party be one high level and the one new guy down at level 1. You'd have a range of experience levels, as each pc is at a different stage of building back up after that player's previous one died.

I'd also contend that a smart player can keep a low level character alive better than a foolish player with a high level one. Finally, in an old school dungeon there are lots of dangers that a large cushion of hitpoints won't protect you from- save or die effects, random effects, etc.

[Falconer]

If he can survive, a low level character adventuring with a higher level group will catch up very quickly, typically making one level per session. There ought to be some penalty for dying, so I thought this was fair. Two levels behind the lowest level member of the party was always my rule of thumb (this meant three or four levels behind some characters). Brand new players I would start as low as I possibly could and yet give them a fair chance at survival. Regards.

[coffee]

One constant refrain I hear in this thread is that a first level character cannot survive with much higher level characters.

Now, when I started, we were playing AD&D but it had its roots directly in D&D. And we always had henchmen. These NPCs were often much lower level than the adventuring party (and since they got half experience, they stayed that way), yet their fatalities were not disproportionately higher.

Of course, if a player replaces his dead character with a first level character, but plays him as though he were still sixth level, he's not going to be around long enough to matter anyway...

So, if I were running a campaign, I'd say first level and leave it at that.

But as someone noted earlier, Jeff Rients has a lovely system for rolling random experience which should work well for determining the level of a new character.

So if I'm running a pick-up or convention game, I'd use Jeff's table regardless of when in the game character creation takes place.

Anyway, that's my two coppers.

[ffilz]

This is something I'm really torn about.

Back in the days, players often had a stable of characters, and they would pull out some low level PCs to adventure with a new PC. The stable also meant they had some handy replacement PCs if their highest level PC died. But as my campaign stabilized, the players pretty much settled on a single PC. Of course high level PCs have lots of options, death is rarely permanent (depening on how bad your traps are), and heck, with AD&D, at worst you needed a druid to re-incarnate you. Of course we also had divine intervention (which was often then fudged).

I personally am interested in trying the game without so too much hand-holding. I am considering an inheritance rule that would allow a replacement PC to start with something, but perhaps it's better to just make all new PCs start at 1st level. I suppose in a high level party, letting a player take over a henchman would be fine. The henchman will have modest equipment (hand-me-down armor and weapons, perhaps a few other items) and be relatively low level compared to the party.

Another option is to allow players to run multiple PCs from the start. Perhaps when the primary PC reaches a level where it would start to get nasty to run a 1st level PC, start a 2nd PC. One thing that might work - make the players rotate who is running a fresh PC. These fresh PCs will gain levels quickly, but since only one or two are played per session, they won't catch all the way up. Then you have honestly played replacement PCs that aren't 1st level, but also aren't right up there at the front. Of course if one player decides to alternate PCs so he has two PCs that are about 1, perhaps 2 levels behind, I guess that would be fine also.

And perhaps that's the best way to handle it. Don't hand the players anything on a silver platter. Remind them about how deadly the game is, make some suggestions, and let them manage if they are going to play one PC unto death and then struggle with replacement, or come up with some scheme to keep a backup PC going.

Frank

[Zulgyan]

One big problem is that any area attack, such as a Fireball, trap, or breath weapon, will totally wipe out the 1st level PC.

So the adventuring will have to be carried in easy parts of the dungeon, that can not be very interesting for the rest of the party.

Thoughts?

[Falconer]

Very good thoughts, Frank.

[ffilz]

If you don't go with AD&D style expanding fireballs, it just means the 1st level PC has to not rush into rooms before knowing what the opponent is.

But taking a session or two at the lower levels (and giving most of the gold to the new PC so he gets more XP) would help safely speed a new PC to a bit of survivability.

Frank

[coffee]

Frank, you make a lot of good points.

Regarding an inheritance rule, Men & Magic has this to say:

"Relatives: The referee may allow players to designate one relative of his character
to inherit his possessions if for any reason the participant unexpectedly disappears,
with or without "death" being positively established, for a period of one
game month, let us say. At this time the relative would inherit the estate of the
character, paying a 10% tax on all goods and monies. The relative must start at
the lowest level of the class he opts for, but he will have the advantage of the
inheritance."

As stated, the new character has to start at the lowest level of experience. But he'd have some pretty good stuff already.

[wulfgar]

Of course for players to take advantage of inheritance they have to store their "estate" somewhere that it can be retrieved from. Most adventurers seem to carry everything they own with them at all times- which can make it difficult to pass to an heir when you've fallen down a pit trap on the 5th level of the dungeons of horror.

[jrients]

On the other hand, if the party members cut the dead man in for a share of that adventure's loot the heir could still have a leg up. And I like the idea of rewarding a player with the forethought to plan an estate.

[ffilz]

I've been really waffling about the inheritance. I have a proposed rule that allows the new PC to gain some XP from the inherrited gold (thus providing a benefit of the GP). But now I'm starting to think about the effects of a new PC gaining all the magic items.

One thought I have is that the loot the deceased has is divided amongst the party, with one share going to the replacement PC (either a henchman or a brand new character from back in town). That would mean a lesser amount of magic, but the replacement PC would get some gold, which would be an instant source of XP.

And then the gold back in town just disappears.

Frank

[Zulgyan]

I have a proposed rule that allows the new PC to gain some XP from the inherrited gold (thus providing a benefit of the GP).

Hey, If you play that XP for gold is earned when the gold is spent(Arneson's method), this can be a good and fun way for handling the death situation!

[Falconer]

You have to:

• kill/defeat/outwit the monster/s
  
• discover all its stuff
  
• haul it safely back to town
  
• sell gems and jewelry
  
• spend all that money in your special interest (or hoard it if money is your special interest)

It’s the completion of ALL these steps which means you have achieved your character’s goal and therefore advance in experience. Just spending money that someone else gave you won’t cut it. Regards

[korgoth]

I favor starting replacements off at 1st level. After all, that's the classic feel of the "replacement": a newbie who has no idea what he's in for. Classically, replacements also have a high casualty rate.

However, as long as you don't have the party constantly being pelted with fireballs and dragon's breath (in which case the problem will be self-correcting because soon everyone will be 1st level) a replacement should be able to hold his own as a mule handler, pole user or torchbearer.

Now, a fairly high level party may even have henchmen and underlings already; some of these may be higher than 1st level. These could be taken over as well.

I don't really like the idea of an adventurer springing up at 5th level like Athena from the head of Zeus. He has no history and his level wasn't earned.

Just my opinion on it.

[howandwhy99]

Also a proponent of starting all new PCs at 1st level. Knowledge is also a high level commodity.

[foster1941]

In theory I strongly support starting all new PCs at 1st level and either the higher-level characters are responsible for helping them along and keeping them alive until they're high enough level to fully contribute, or the low-level characters have side-adventures until they're high enough level to join the main party. However, in practice, where the group only gets together once a month and it's always the same 5 players, that approach probably won't work. In that case, I'd probably bite the bullet and grudgingly allow the new PC to start at 1/2 the XP (which is to say generally 1 level below) the lowest total of any PC in the party, even though I hate doing that (and even hate it as a player -- any character that didn't start at 1st level with 0 XP doesn't feel "real" to me).

[Zulgyan]

Look it from the CHARACTERS side, in the gameworld. Why the hell a 7th level party would like to be joined by a 1st level begginer? He will be more of a problem than an aid. And it would slow down their own progress. I don't know if the characters (not the players, because they are good folks) are into charity, helping the low-level types out. Imagine dividing the treasure with the 1st level type that hasn't help in anything to defeat the giant, for example. In many cases this would be ridiculous incharacter. He was just hiding behind the rock, shotting arrows now and them, most of the time missing. Would the other character want to give him 1000gp of the 5000gp treasure?

To find a replacement, the would look for someone worthy to join them. There are not there to help other adventurers start out, but to further their goals. That's why they only allow someone with a respectable ability to join them and take part in the treasure distribution.

[jrients]

In a campaign that makes extensive use of henchmen and hirelings one more 3 hit point punk won't be a concern. Especially in when you're at the optimal ratio of 1 referee per 20 players!

[wulfgar]

zulgyan said:

Why the hell a 7th level party would like to be joined by a 1st level begginer?

The fresh fish can:

-check for traps
-carry the stuff
-hold the torch
-administer healing potions
-draw the map
-solve riddles
-parley with foes
-tend to the mule

None of that stuff requires a high level. A sports team isn't all experienced players. There are rookies too. A business isn't all old-timers. There are interns too. I don't see any reason why an adventuring party wouldn't include new guys as well.

[ffilz]

Definitely specifics of the play group need to be accounted for. Sometimes even a specific player needs to be accounted for.

The best solution for a once a month group might be henchmen. They can all be hired as rank newbies, so they are built up in actual play.

In fact, if you allowed a player to at any time retire a PC and take over a henchman as a PC, that could allow lots of flexibility. Though perhaps it could be abused (hate playing 1st level magic users? Play a 1st level fighter with a 1st level magic-user henchman, when the henchman gets to be a decent level, retire the fighter).

A henchman swapout rule might also make demi-humans a little more palatable with their level limits. Play them as a PC at low levels, then let them become henchmen when they hit their level limit. To make this more workable, you could allow a PC who is lower level than the rest of the PCs to become a henchmen. So you would play your halfling until the rest of the PCs make 5th level. At that point, the halfling becomes a henchman, and the player takes over a human henchman. The good part is the now henchman halfling will have a strong personality.

Being real open about being able to take over henchmen I think would also get them treated better, and they would be developed more. I think you could find literary support for this idea too. One could argue for the hobbitts in the fellowship other than Frodo started off as henchmen, but later they became full fledged PCs.

Frank

[ffilz]

The ability of 7th level PCs to find replacement 7th levels from a character perspective depends on just what PC really means. How many other adventurers are there? Are there really non-1st level types looking to join a different party?

As long as there isn't a ready supply of non-1st level recruits, the adventuring party will HAVE to mentor new 1st level characters.

Mentoring and apprenticeship is a time honored tradition and would certainly be a part of adventuring.

I would also add that the D&D leveling scheme is so far out from any sort of reality that trying to use real world logic fails. I think in the end, you have to treat D&D as a game that has specific rules. Is it any different than chess? Chess has some pretty illogical rules, but it's an awesome game...

Frank

[Zulgyan]

wulfgar said:

zulgyan said:

Why the hell a 7th level party would like to be joined by a 1st level begginer?

The fresh fish can:

-check for traps
-carry the stuff
-hold the torch
-administer healing potions
-draw the map
-solve riddles
-parley with foes
-tend to the mule

None of that stuff requires a high level. A sports team isn't all experienced players. There are rookies too. A business isn't all old-timers. There are interns too. I don't see any reason why an adventuring party wouldn't include new guys as well.

Higher level characters can also do that, and help when fighting becomes involved ;D

I mean, of course the PLAYERS want to help their gaming partner. But do the character really want that from a role-playing perspective?

The ability of 7th level PCs to find replacement 7th levels from a character perspective depends on just what PC really means. How many other adventurers are there? Are there really non-1st level types looking to join a different party?

Well, not another 7th level. But maybe a 5th level, or even a 3rd level at least.

[jrients]

ffilz said:

The ability of 7th level PCs to find replacement 7th levels from a character perspective depends on just what PC really means. How many other adventurers are there? Are there really non-1st level types looking to join a different party?

That's a great issue. Is a 4th level fighter just a dude with some extra hit dice or a Hero of one or more battles? Is every village priest in your campaign actually a level 3 cleric? I prefer that the powers of adventurers are special. They are a rare breed.