Level 1 in DnD Is Terrible

If your DM is a war criminal who makes you start the game as weak little mortals, sent them this.
Just the thought of starting a campaign at lvl 1 makes me want to drop logs into my fruit of the looms and cry my eyes out.
You don't even get my links, I made this thing in like 6 hours to send to my party.

[@toastedmarsh6185]

The main issue i find with lv 1 is creating backstory. Players normally write around subclass rather than class so if you dont have that subclass then it ends up being “ I have trained for many years in a far away place to perform martial arts you’ve never seen before. You will continue not to see til we beat up tavern rats.”

[@SupahTrunks7]

yeah its even harder with bards and wizards where its like "what did I study in college? before i can answer that i need to kill a couple goblins, otherwise they wont send me my degree" or the other way around where you kill a few rats and suddenly you have a diploma

[@tzaphkielconficturus7136]

What? You want to make more than 3 choices at character creation that affect how you play the game? I suppose you'll have to pic Variant Human, and have everyone look at you sideways, because it gives your fighter 33% more choices. I suppose you could play a caster, and get an extra choice of spells. At least that's sort of interesting.

[@toastedmarsh6185]

Thats another problem I have. How to you smoothly give subclasses without being oop I can now create an echo that would have been very useful earlier or you have to do something like side quests for every character to get their subclass

[@Mercenary0712]

Pathfinder 2e does is right with giving you your subclass on lvl1. Plus lvl1 characters are actually fun in that system

[@dizzydial8081]

@@toastedmarsh6185 A lot of the leveling is "yadda yadda" for the sake of brevity. Imagine having each player go through a separate quest for certain abilities and spells. Sounds like it could bog down a game. An easier way while still yadda yadda-ing leveling up is having players pay for training during down time. But what if you're playing Curse of Strahd? Should your players be locked in at a decent level to have just enough tools to deal with whatever problems they may face, or should there be proper facilities for them to gain their new abilities?

[@PineappleLiar]

One thing I tend to find odd about level 1 is that it’s basically a great horror game level, then once it’s done you become a real character and the mechanics of the entire game shift to normal D&D after that. One to two levels is all it takes to go from ‘my life is constantly in danger and I am doing all I can to survive’ to ‘yeah uhhh I stab the goblin and it dies, yeah a 15 hits my AC so what’. Both can be fun, it’s just a dramatic tone shift is all.

[@embersmirage3896]

I mean you go pick up a kitchen knife and try to fight a wolf. Right now. Or get decent physical training in before and learn to make good Molotowcocktails beforehand. Unless you have combat experience of course, then think about us fleshy commoners with knifes in our hands. We need training to not just die, I think the horror game part was intended

[@Silungar]

Yeah, I think that's the worst part: level 1 and 2 are kinda designed to be the "tutorial levels", with many classes only getting actual stuff to manage at level 3 (subclasses, 2nd level spells, etc.), but the problem is: those 2 levels are the hardest and most lethal levels by far! Having the early game be more challenging than the late game is a common design flaw across all types of games, but having the tutorial be the hardest part is just... not good. And even worse: The high chance of you just dying, because some random goblin rolled a six on their damage roll while your cleric has already spent their one healing word together with important character aspects like your subclass not even being available yet basically encourages you not to care about your character - or roleplaying in general. The difference in PC "quality" I've seen between level 1 characters and level 3 ones is staggering, especially since so many characters just don't make sense if they don't start out with their subclass unlocked (looking at you, Paladins, there's a reason BG3 makes you pick your Oath at level 1...)

[@Silungar]

​@@embersmirage3896 True, but A) I have a greatsword and a suit of armor, not just a knife, B) I have 16 Strength, that's six more than the human average, C) I have a tenacity and fighting spirit high enough to the point where I can straight up ignore mortal wounds via Second Wind. Trust me: I AM able to take on a wolf. And so are my friends who can shoot fire out of their hands like a flamethrower or get someone from bleeding out on the floor back into the fight with a single spoken word. Adventurers are NOT commoners.

[@chucklefuck]

​@@embersmirage3896Trade the knife for a spear and it's both a more realistic and more feasible scenario

[@bytheburnside7539]

@embersmirage3896 okay but a level 1 fighter isnt me with a kitchen knife, a level 1 fighter is already a trained warrior.

[@HawtDawg]

The " I can cure you at level 2 " actually got me so bad, genuinely funny to me

[@Ghastly_Grinner]

We have been starting at level 3 for years now. Level 3 feels like you have finished your training and you know what you are doing so you can go out in the world

[@NatalieE500]

i agree. Starting at level 3 is way better!

[@CorrosiveCitrus]

Yeah level 1 and 2 are more introductory phases for people new to TTRPGs

[@chainer8686]

I've started players at level 2, using level 1 as their session zero start, sometimes with backstory basically being what they went through at level 1. And then they level up to 3 after the first big fight, which usually takes place as the climax of the first session. According to my players, it feels like a good kickoff to a campaign to have just gotten a level before the first official session, and to level up again after their characters got to know eachother for the first time. It also gives some players direction as to choosing their progression options as the game evolves. Players feel more like their experiences are lying down the early stones of a foundation. Side note; A couple of the players do choose entire builds, pre planned all the way to level 20, and I feel bad for them as I can not ever guarantee a campaign is going to last that long. But at the same time, one of those guys belives the game should cater to his build, not his character in this context, and more often, if anything might have the slightest edge in fighting his character, then he calls it bad DM'ing and trying to kill his pc. Pre-planning a build and wanting the god-like power fantasy is fine, but it isn't how I choose to run campaigns.

[@Evelyn-rb1zj]

I like level three because at that point chances are everyone should have a subclass which makes backstory writing easier (honestly I usually pick warlock if I'm pretty sure we're going to get stuck at level 1 or 2 for a while because it makes life easier especially because I'm often super lucky with rolling stats and I love making pact of the fiend tomelocks far too much) so level 1 I can be like "yay I just killed that rat I'll just casually gain effectively half my hitpoints (or more) worth of temporary hit points" and then by level 2 "I have agonising blast now so I'm doing heavy crossbow damage but better and I'm still getting 6 or 7 temp hp every time I kill something!" I imagine Clerics might be quite similar but I haven't played many of those so I don't know how they play and I honestly just prefer warlocks flavour wise and it gives me a bit of a break from being the only healer due to playing bards and Rangers (yes my ranger with goodberry and herbalism kit proficiency is often the only "healer" in the party))

[@hollowknight4630]

My main issue with level 1 and 2 is that so many classes don’t have their subclass and a lot of people BUILD CHARACTERS AROUND THE SUBCLASS, I start at level 3 so your character can have that full identity out of the gate

[@spooderous]

That's entirely the fucking point. You aren't created special.

[@ktrilex7001]

You still can build the character around a subclass, so long as you don't build it around the subclasses abilities. Every subclass has a theme, and your character can follow that theme with narrative and flavor. Acquiring the subclasses abilities is an evolution of following that path you've set at the start. It's usually more reliable to build a character around world building and background, I think. Then the abilities just fit the character you created and not the opposite.

[@loganjblack]

​​@@ktrilex7001 mean, if I want to play an eldritch knight I have to wait till level 3 to actually get magic, and when I do get magic it isn't a few cantrips or anything it's whole 1st level spells and a magic bond with my weapon. Same goes for any other subclass with some wierd power, even the ones that don't would still be nice to have your defining feature at the start of the game, because Subclass is the biggest thing that differentiates the capabilities of 2 characters with the same class (except maybe Weapon/Spell selection). Also, I would wager barely anyone makes a character without a subclass in mind. If I'm making a fighter I'm gonna decide if I want them to be focused on protecting the allies by their side or if I want them to use spells alongside their combat. If I'm making a Wizard you bet I'm gonna think about what their main spell school will be. If I'm making a Paladin I'm gonna be choosing an Oath (Paladin is the most obvious class that needs it's subclass moved to level 1) while making them, etc. And they should have their main thinf at level 1, you shouldn't have to wait for your character to get their core differentiating thing they've been training for and should have by now.

[@5-Volt]

As someone that loves Clerics, Warlocks & Sorcs because of this.. I'm about to feel this pain in the next version of 5e..

[@ktrilex7001]

@@loganjblack I understand that. The first content players get in contact with, in any campaign really, is the material to build a character: classes, sublcasses, spells etc. So, naturally, character creation tends to start at that content, and not at the setting itself. Ultimately, what I described and what you described are two different ways of creating a character. The former being more dependent on information about the setting and the world the campaign is set on.

[@Fallenmonkd20]

If your DM doesn't start you at level 5 with a free feat, a business, and my own Pony you are legally allowed to leave

[@TheMariosack]

I better roll with advantage on penis length

[@mauriceschannel1945]

Real

[@SergeantSniper]

Petition for ponies for everyone at the start of every session.

[@wilpri123456]

well you're not wrong

[@Aargo999]

Youre even legally allowed to make comments

[@bigslurpee2078]

I will simply run an entire campaign at level 1

[@Jedibigfoot]

Yeah that is quite simple when everyone dies session 1 and have to start a new campaign 😆

[@simonfsson817]

This guy I both loathe and love at the same time

[@thered1s276]

Finally an interesting campaign

[@TheRedMammoth]

Amatuer. Proper games start out with players as commoners and spend the entire campaign becoming level 1 adventurers.

[@Caterpie56]

@@TheRedMammoth Commoners to level one sidekicks to level one adventurers

[@platypuslord8391]

You had me in the first half as my current campaign of 20 sessions started at lvl 1 and I was gonna construct it until I saw the end, right as always Runesmith.

[@dizzydial8081]

Session 1: "okay, you're all orphans and for some reason there are thugs attacking and killing everyone. Either escape the building with your life or try to survive somehow." Level 20 wizard because of this video: "I'll upcast fireball at 9th level and kill the thugs."

[@ArchibaldVonSkip]

And everyone else. End of the campaign.

[@kennpeters1973]

​@@ArchibaldVonSkipI didn't ask how big the room was, I said I cast Fireball.

[@ArchibaldVonSkip]

@@kennpeters1973 Good way to know if the 'barkeep' was a fiend all along.

[@kennpeters1973]

@@ArchibaldVonSkip Fireball is the solution to all problems and answers all questions 😆

[@trinwheeler4639]

​@@kennpeters1973and you can get metamagic adept to change the damage type if it's immune to fire, boom, perfect spell

[@gokufirespit8418]

When I first introduced dnd to my friends I made it very clear that since we were starting at low level, they shouldn’t expect their characters to look like their favorite anime characters, but more like the dweeby one that gets stronger in season 2.

[@clarkside4493]

I will say, DMs running for level 1 characters could stand to use more CR 0 and CR 1/8th creatures and fewer CR 1/4th creatures. Speaking from experience, most CR 0 creatures' minimal damage adds up pretty quickly. It also gives two-weapon fighting characters and spellcasters with _Acid Splash_ or _Thunderclap_ or _Word of Radiance_ some better use. It feels really cool to cleave through or blast away those wimpy monsters.

[@RawCauliflower]

Well maybe because, as a dm, I don't want my players to go around butchering IRL animals just because they make up the majority of options for CR0 and CR1/8th creatures. Otherwise killing fictional but mundane creatures that are 4x less the player character's weight class is a bit lame.

[@clarkside4493]

@@RawCauliflower if your players would go around killing random animals in real life, you need new players.

[@SavageGreywolf]

@@RawCauliflower invent some magic bullshit that makes the animals hostile. A wizard did that magic bullshit. The wizard uses the stat block of the evil mage from Phandelver.

[@thecoolestofthe834s2]

@@RawCauliflower this guy sounds like he would get mad if a wolf attacks you and you kill it

[@blueman4232]

i always run a few sessions at level 1 for new players, its a lot less overwhelming

[@kopaxson5202]

a FEW!? You mean one session, right?!

[@tzaphkielconficturus7136]

Overwhelming? 5th edition D&D? A three legged cat could pick up a premade character of any level and play the game with at most 5 minutes of explanation. Add in 30 minutes of reading, and they can make the character, and know what they're doing.

[@aisushitai2680]

@@tzaphkielconficturus7136 a bit hyperbolic, but yes, likely all of the essential information about DND5E could reasonably be taught to a brand new player in less than a day.

[@blueman4232]

@@tzaphkielconficturus7136 if you've never played a ttrpg before it can feel like a lot....and how does the cat having three legs play into this lol

[@blueman4232]

@@kopaxson5202 depends i guess. I'm running tWBTW rn and being level one until they leave the carnival has felt natural. It's very combat light, so being low level helps encourage problem solving and again, is helping the two new players i have internalize their basic abilities before adding on more layers.

[@AwesomeWookiee]

One slight correction: The Green Knight is fuckin' awesome if you're in for psychological films about chivalric values.

[@Stormer13]

It was such a trippy movie, and I enjoyed it so much.

[@falkyrie5228]

I think that was the joke. It's like Terrible Writer Advice, to drive home how dumb the narrator is, he also made it have bad taste.

[@Umbrellagasm]

Man I donno I love trippy films but I had such a bad time watching that movie - I thought it was gonna be right up my alley but by about halfway I was begging for mercy

[@thelastchannelonyoutube]

Okay, counter arguement: some of the most fun I had playing DnD was playing a level one character trying to work around my weakness and make my decisions count. I vividly remember a time where me and my group were fighting a low level monster and it was one of the most thrilling memories I had of the game. When every hit point counts and there's a real risk your character might die, that's when the excitement comes in.

[@thecoolestofthe834s2]

yes we go goblin slayer on spiders for this very reason we almost died to a spooder in the first part of the game 1 spider i still remeber screaming when we killed it

[@thajocoth]

The game I'm running now, the players were level 1 for 2 sessions and are going to be level 2 until the end of the next session (session 5). Not only did I start them at level 1, I started them kidnapped, in cages, with all their gear right outside those cages. (This is how the party met.) The warlock flipped the lever to open all the cages by casting Eldritch Blast through the bars. The druid used Speak With Animals to keep the newly freed beasts from attacking them. They had to kill one monstrosity (with the animals' help) before going upstairs. Next they fought some elementals (6 different mephits) and made excellent use of cover to destroy them all. The gnome alchemist that kidnapped them? Dead by the end of the surprise round. With level 1 characters. That was all done in the first game session.

[@tomjohnson4922]

I did that! Well kidnapped on a pirate ship but almost the same.

[@ArchibaldVonSkip]

The characters were level 1, The players level 20.

[@thajocoth]

@@ArchibaldVonSkip Fair enough!

[@aisushitai2680]

As Archibald already commented, your players are seemingly more experienced than most others just by the description of how efficient their combat went.

[@messymessr]

Wouldn't work with my DM 'cause EB technically only targets creatures :(

[@bytheburnside7539]

Honestly my solution to the level 1-3 Problem is to simply start out all player characters with an extra 5-10 HP. Genuinely fixes everything with no real drawbacks long term because that amount of hp is negligible by level 4, but a massive game changer at levels 1 and 2

[@CB-vx1fu]

This is exactly what i did i let them roll a hit dice in addition to their dice full value. Combat is still on a knifes edge.

[@anothermicrobe755]

As a DM, this video touched my heart and changed my ways. How could I ever have expected my players to be creative? That was so cruel of me. Anyways, now each player gets one wish spell per session. I hope that this will help fix the harm I have done.

[@erdoombog6963]

I started using Old School Rules to make my session be something else than "we pg are op and we solve every problem we meet using just combat". Now that they risk even fighting a wolf, they try always new way to avoid combat and everyone is more involved than ever!

[@anitoancognita7060]

​​@@erdoombog6963upcast fireball lvl 9 brr

[@thecoolestofthe834s2]

@@erdoombog6963 see that only works when your party is kitted out for it also if your party is OP you cant do encounters right like im not shitting on you but like idk gie them a challenge

[@tomwardle]

As a person who has played a lot of DnD, yeah, level one can be frustrating, so I usually prefer to start at level 3 and the same.goes for the games I run as a DM. However, with a great DM and good table of players, it can be a blast, especially if the.focus is on the characters exploring their classes and role playing there advancements gain of class features on a smaller, more personal scale.

[@VestedUTuber]

I have to agree with Level 3 being a good starting point. It gives you a decent baseline of your class's abilities and guarantees everyone starts with their subclass while still giving room to grow.

[@indiana47]

I'm leaning more towards level 5 for a starting level, but that is just because I prefer to run higher level campaigns and I want my players to eventually reach level 20. Level 3 is a good spot though.

[@gaidencastro9706]

In Old D&D, spellcasters were meant to be really bad early-game, but rewarding to push into the late game.

[@battery2720]

oddly enough, I found that when campaigns start at 1st level, it kinda forces the characters to get creative and work with each other because they know they'll die if they don't. This also is great for character bonding in the beginning, because we're all equally weak instead of one person being a one man army while the rest are struggling to simple tasks, as well as figuring out how to most effectively level up your characters to fit in the party. The campaigns that I've had most fun in started at 1st level. Anyway, that was long...

[@xzanman]

I think that was kinda what runesmith was trying to point out. It is obvious by the video that he is a huge fan of starting at level 1

[@jimjimson6208]

That was literally the point of the video lmao istg some people have never heard sarcasm in their life

[@Nillerus]

You didn't even bother to watch a two minute video to the end before commenting. Bruh

[@battery2720]

​@jimjimson6208 let's be honest, logan isn't the best at displaying sarcasm

[@battery2720]

​@@Nillerusbruh

[@JustASleepyFox]

Nothing better to make my day than a runesmith upload.

[@timslack7568]

I agree, but also probably one of my favorite moments Ive had playing was when my lvl 1 druid didnt even make it to the starter town because he ran into 2 goats who proceeded to ram him into a paste. It was a solo campaign so that played a part of it, and its not necessarily fun because you cant do much but at the same time theres something exciting about knowing every moment could be your last, whereas higher levels it can take a few turns before everything goes to shit

[@Max-xz8hl]

I like starting at level 1 personally. Levels 1 and 2 feel like the 'initiation test' for D&D characters and it feels cool looking back when you do reach Level 3 that only a few sessions again you were tackling a few Goblins or thugs but are already fighting actual monsters, makes it feel our characters have passed the bar and are ready to be real adventurers.

[@thenoremac2685]

I started the players for my latest table at level 2. I find it's a good balance between simplicity for new players, yet you also have some resources to work with.

[@spookydooms]

That’s what I do. Unless their story calls for it. Even then, I’ll do level 1 and give ‘em an extra d4 of health.

[@zekeludlow4536]

At Level 1 I consider my players to basically be the equivalent to a CR 1/4 bandit, basically a normal person but with so extra skills, which to me as a DM and Player really really really boring. So I always have a cession 0 where we don’t do any dice rolls and we just talk, I explain home rules, everyone set boundaries, and I explain any relevant or important lore about the world and their characters. Which at the end I consider a milestone and let them level up to 2 or 3 depending on what kind of game or story I want to tell or my players want to play.

[@kopaxson5202]

CR 1/4th bandit is supposed to be as strong as a level 1 player. Isn't that literally how CR works? Party level divided by 4 = CR. So a party of 4 level 1 characters would be the same as 4 CR 1/4th creatures.

[@minokakio6758]

@@kopaxson5202except cr is bullshit. Bandits have more hp then all but barbarians or fighters with 16 con and thei attacks are only slightly weaker then the average lvl 1 fighters. So they are effectively lvl 1 fighters who rolled really bad stats and have no armor.

[@kopaxson5202]

@@minokakio6758 Sure, but doesn't the DMG literally say CR is roughly equal to player level divided by 4?

[@minokakio6758]

@@kopaxson5202 well like i said cr is not a balanced system. 4 bandats may be a balanced encounter but generally 4 lvl 1 adventures will have incredibly varied difficulty dealing with them but on average a character will have like 3-7 dpr a round and when a single crit from any bandit can kill the casters its hard.

[@mollymauktealeaf]

@@kopaxson5202 No, it says a creature of a given challenge rating should be a fair but not deadly challenge for a 4 person party of that level.

[@seekingfurtherlight34]

This feels like there's a story behind this

[@s-o-tariknomad6970]

I once ran a campaign that was on level 1 for 5 sessions and it went great. Tho it was specifically a Heist themed game during that part of the campaign, and I gave them all a Bonus Feat and allowed them to buy feats with enough Gold. It was good. People used their secondary proficiencies more. I think level 1 play is fun.

[@xanderbradfield7569]

I am running level 1 right now and it is the most fun we have had playing DnD in a very very long time. That’s all I got to say.

[@Klint_Izwudd]

I find the sense of helplessness at level one has the potential for a survival focused first session. Maybe not as harsh as crawling out of a burning hospital, or running around with your hands tied while a dragon sacks the village, but something to give a sense of direction before you get powerful enough to do something about the burning hospital dragon.

[@emoAnarchist]

0:50 me, a warlock main, not understanding what's wrong

[@net_spider]

Level 1 through 3 in 5e is basically tutorial. They made it simple so people could ease their way in. In 3.5 edition and Pathfinder 1st edition, 1st level is an okay starting point for the most part, but its much more complicated and you can do more mechanically (outside of your class of course).

[@KnicKnac]

I enjoy the grit level 1-3. You just might bite the dust before your real adventure starts which builds character.

[@thered1s276]

Full agree. My favorite play experiences have been playing and running for very low level PCs. ambient effects matter, utility matters, the mundane items that you start with on your character sheet matters. I have 5 detailed characters with fleshed out builds ready to go, all under level 4.

[@Gunthersby]

I wrote a very lengthy backstory for a fledgling adventurer, basic human fighter, with the specific mindset that he could develop into anything that'll fit the party. Dreamt about it for actual months. First real combat had me down in one hit and almost killed without getting to do anything. Nobody liked the character either, from how I designed him, because they felt I was always trying to steal the spotlight and do things I shouldn't be able to (my actions had to make realistic sense AND be RAW, so my turns were mostly "attack with sword")

[@archmagemc3561]

This is why I like pathfinder. They give you an extra 8 hp at first level, while DPR for level 1 creatures is the same or even lower.

[@chasedavis9336]

"I wanna beat that chicken." There's a euphemism if I've ever heard one.

[@sirunklydunk8861]

What, you don't want to die because a Goblin ripped ass in your general direction?

[@WildWolfGod]

Goblin ate bad meat and accidentally cast Cloudkill without knowing any magic

[@Undomaranel]

For beginners to D&D, level 1-5 is perfect to get a grasp on the flow of everything. My first game was a half Drow ranger, and having Goodberry, Alarm, a sword and bow was enough for starting out. My second game was a level 20 holiday one shot where we were ALL compeltely overwhelmed, giving the sister who played more with her church group a chance to brag ("That's how you play a level 20 character, scrubs!") My third was a coworker's Strahd campaign where I hopped in as a defecting half vamp monk, level 9, at the Amber Temple (with the dice completely against me lol). I understood the flow and possibilities, but had no notion of how to combo or spending ki points... but still had enough fun loaning my Cloak of the Bat to that Golem to set off all those traps as we descended... and the group somehow kept Kasimir as the DMPC tank AND resurrected the dragon from the skull... good times lol though I was playing a Rogue by then due to the dice hating me. Consider levels 1-3 the tutorial, and 4-5 as the beginning area of a video game, like when Link wakes up or you finally have something on every FF screen. It's essential for newbies to learn the ropes, but starting experienced players off with hand holding is treating them like noobs.

[@benjrc3611]

I actually had to argue with a DM to let me and my friends start at level 1 because two of them are brand new to the game and they were overwhelmed with level 3.

[@Aargo999]

Yeah! Screw those other players at the table and their current campaign progress

[@benjrc3611]

@@Aargo999 it was session 0, no progress had been made

[@THEFabianValenzuela]

@@Aargo999?

[@snes90]

Thank you, I absolutely hate level 1 and start my players, even new ones, at 3. That's when everyone gets to pick the class specialties and such. But I am intrigued by a "Level 0 adventure" where everyone plays as commoners that die like flies and get replaced.

[@kennpeters1973]

I think that's called Dungeon Crawl. If I'm remembering the right system, it's a grinder dungeon game where you are expected to die over and over. Bob World Builder has some videos on it, he's a fan of the system.

[@snes90]

@@kennpeters1973 I'll check it out, thanks!

[@moekitsune]

@@kennpeters1973 That sounds atrocious.

[@thecoolestofthe834s2]

@@moekitsune it is noone plays it becausei t just turns into: you see a spike pit pcs: we jump into it over and over until our bodys fill up the hole gm: what

[@absyntheproductions3330]

The worst part is that I’m basically not allowed to have an established backstory. I’m 300 years old, I have a PHD in arcana and you’re telling me I can’t cast misty step?

[@wickederebus]

Yes.

[@Heliaclay]

I love playing level one, and especially dming level one characters

[@Aargo999]

And i love sepsis. Two things we have in common 😄

[@chaoticnote]

Sitting down with 10 extra character sheets is unironically the old way of playing D&D.

[@GA15ls]

The ideas that you point out about level 1 and I would argue also kind of applie to level 2 is part of the reson I plan to change the way I run my next campain where my party starts at level 1. I plan on running the first two levels with that heart pounding tension of a horror story. So when they get to level 3 and are able to play a more normal campain they can look back and really feel the diffrence between when their characters started to where they are now.

[@Jedibigfoot]

was half expecting a plug for quest-o-nomicon solving all the level 1 issues XD

[@JazzJackrabbit]

Level 1 is the Glass cannon level. Martials get a chance to shine for a time before the casters steal the show. It has its own charm. GM just has to know what they are doing, is all.

[@ravensflockmate]

casters don't steal the show

[@diogoteixeira4950]

​@@ravensflockmateyes they do.

[@ravensflockmate]

@@diogoteixeira4950 no not really

[@maus8737]

⁠​⁠​⁠@@diogoteixeira4950casters *can* steal the show, player just has to know what they are doing, is all.

[@corrinthechocolatine4025]

@@maus8737 If the GM doesn't heavily counterbalance it, casters can and will always steal the show at later levels. They can bring down the apocalypse, alter the minds of their foe, create castles out of nothing and reshape the freaking reality. Meanwhile martials can swing their sword one more time per round and resist poison better.

[@jeroenceulemans3715]

As a lvl 1 Paladin I feel pretty powerful compared to other classes, but mage classes having below 10hp feels like they are too squishy and they should not have to roll more con to compensate for that.

[@ravensflockmate]

paladin level 1 and 2 is intolerable wym?

[@Damian2Tall]

All I heard at the end was "Don't bully the players. Bully the DM".

[@blakehudson478]

Level 1 and 2, to me, are the most underrated levels in DnD. It bums me out that nearly every game I join starts everyone at level 3, because those first two levels are so, so important in letting the players know how vulnerable they are. It encourages you to try to be creative, plan ahead, and know when to use your equipment and spells at just the right moment. Its the levels you go through to instill those ever-important, old school dnd lessons that players wouldn't get otherwise. One other thing I feel skipping to 3rd level misses is that it tends to overload less experienced spellcasting players too early. I would be a wealthy man if I had a dollar for every time a player got to be level 3 or 5 at the start and had no idea they had level 1 spells beyond shield, bless, or other similar 'optimal' spells that were useful. By starting with only 1 or 2 spells at level 1, it lets new spellcasters get a hang of the skills and see how important one well timed spell can be when used just right, rather than throwing their spellslots around like candy.

[@dminard1]

Imagine if the game had cool social or investigation aspect where a character was more than just a power level. Then a low level character could poke around where they shouldn't and feel that thrill.

[@hugofontes5708]

Yes, that is going to go very well with my whole +2 to anything charisma

[@chaotickreg7024]

The reason I think level 1 play is so important is because you need to know who your character is when they're not doing magical feats. Sometimes, players only know how to use abilities, and that is all they become, the game. Make sure your players can roleplay before you give them lists of mechanical things to get distracted with or you'll just get "I am fireball wizard, and if I'm not constantly throwing fireballs, I'm not having fun."

[@MyCarnageExtreme]

This is an amazing point! As a player I need time to figure out my character, sometimes it's just not easy.

[@BH_test]

To be fair to the green knight- Gawain does get a high level magic axe and becomes famous in the opening

[@nisfornightowl_]

I feel like lvl 1 can be used affectively if your party is more accepting of not having a lot of backstory and instead letting influential character moments happen to the character in game, like you can plan for what subclass you want to take but the catalyst moment that would make the character have those abilities and begin that part of their story hasn't happened yet. ex. a barbarian plans to go into wild magic, maybe in game the party runs into a villain mage and the barbarian is forced to take a lot of magical dmg because they're the tank but afterwards they're sparking magic and have a strange new connection to it, in this way the subclass becomes something that the characters need to learn about because they don't understand it, it becomes a part of the active story. of course this won't work for every table but for some it might.

[@mysteriouswatts]

The Quest-O-Nomicon does actually make Level 1 work pretty well, no thanks to Wizards.

[@coolboy9979]

How so, what did it do?

[@mysteriouswatts]

@@coolboy9979 There are a couple videos about it on XP to Level 3 and Arcane Arcade that explain it way better than I ever could, since they ARE the ones who made the book. kzbin.info/www/bejne/bJCrcohrm6hka5Y kzbin.info/www/bejne/lWjXqpSVobxlps0

[@techpriest8965]

"Make the players come up with creative solutions" In a game where there is a spell for every situation across the goddamn multiverse. "Here, have this complex and engaging problem" "Here, I cast this spell, situation dealt with" A simple ravine crossing is not enough. The ravine has to have geysers of antimagic water, fog, swarm of blind, giant bats, slick rock surface you can slip on and a ballista manned by a chaos infused Flumph on the other side to even REMOTELY pose a threat to the PC's.

[@JAY-gl5xd]

Thank you. I'm stealing that chaos Flumph idea. The Phlumf.

[@thelazyspartan4435]

I ran a game last weekend of lost mines of phandelver and the party took out the initial goblins without taking damage then nearly lost to the two at the start of the cave. They kept on missing and the goblins kept rolling high

[@larrylightfoot22222]

This has big April 1st energy for a video released at the end of July

[@eventhorizon492]

Which is why I start all my campaigns at level 3 so that my players can ACTUALLY USE THEIR SUBCLASS

[@ogre7699]

I relate to this. Level 1 is fucking abysmal, as you don't have subclasses yet. It gets more complex, sure, but I'd rather start at Level 3, and fuck around with subclasses, or really neuter myself and multiclass and hope for the best, which is still better than having one class at Level 1. At least with the latter, I'd have to level both, but I'd have two classes to mess around with than just one. The game opens up much more at Level 3, and that's where the fun begins. I've been there, and I.. Just kinda wished there was more.

[@wickederebus]

Some 5e classes get their subclass at level 1, some at level 2, and some at level 3.

[@moekitsune]

@@wickederebus That's a major design flaw of 5e. PF2e fixes it by giving every class its subclass at level 1.

[@fakechemicals]

Hey, Gary! Get a load of this guy! This guy over here wants a rabbit and a hat and a bat and a 64 impala at level 1.

[@Eisenwulf666]

Going really hard with the videos lately, i'm loving it. Can't stop winning

[@Ozziemandias56]

Finally, a take of yours I can agree with.

[@SuperUnnamedplayer]

Y'know what? No! Fork you and your character. If you want to handwave why your character suddenly learned 2 new spells and a whole new class whilst in the middle of a dungeon, you'll survive building your backstory around not yet having your subclass. And if I hear it one more time, we're starting next campaign with a Level 0 funnel. Hope you have at least 6 characters ready for that one.

[@azurewraith2585]

Level 1-3 has a really fun dynamic if you play it right. Players can get one shot but so can enemies so if you run it just right you can get crazy moments where the fighter solos 6 goblins and feels like a badass from how close he was to death.

[@wolfyboy]

Thats what I feel! Unless we have plenty of health potions or healing spells, it feels down right stupid to get in a fight with anything worse than a medium sized rat!

[@Mr.Bellafante]

I've found that starting at level 1 works for completely new players in 5E, but that's it. Once players understand the basics of the game, starting at level 3 works better.

[@TrollOfReason]

Ambitious commoners at level 1 don't save the day. Start at level 3 if you want to keep a sense of mortality going, but be able to give your players stuff they can do.

[@thered1s276]

Clearly you're not ambitious enough. sounds like a skill diff

[@CooperAATE]

"Ambitious commoners" haven't learned how to cast multiple leveled spells a day, or jog for 8 hours in 75lbs armor while swinging a 10lbs hammer at everything. A level-1 PC is leagues above a commoner in skill.

[@Aargo999]

@@CooperAATEdude, look up commoner spell caster. It starts at level two lol

[@TrollOfReason]

@@CooperAATE Not in HP tho, lol.

[@al-trujillo]

...and this is why I start with lvl 0 games: it'll give them one more Hit Dice, a Homebrewed Mini-Feat (there's one for each of the Ability Scores and acts like a hybrid Class of which ones use that Score), and shorten the "tutorial" session to one. I also give free Padded Armor (to any that have Proficiency for it) and +10gp to supplement what their Background give them, though in exchange they do not start with their Class Features, its Saves & Skills, or its Items until the following session. I do timelapse level-ups, so during the time between 0 and 1 is when the players' characters will have obtained the items and training to pursue the Class type they have decided to go with. I have noted this to be a net positive with the players since the Mini-Feat works a bit like an enhanced Magic Initiate to either diversify or supplement their capabilities in a similar way to a level-dip can offer without having weigh against their max levels; all of this while not being too much of a boon that I have to skew the Challenge Rating to compensate and it not being an inconvenience since the players get everything they would normally have by the time Session 1 comes around. Since Session 0s tend to not get as much time to get a game going since a good portion of that goes to writting up the Character Sheets, by cutting down the time to get one ready and diving right into gameplay, it encourages those that would otherwise feel the sheet-making process be daunting to break the process up into two smaller portions. Even still, indecisive players will also not feel as locked in to their starting Class and the others will have more time to collaborate which roles they will like to play out.

[@al-trujillo]

And before anyone asks "what about certain Backgrounds that...", note that players still need to work with their DMs about how that gets incorporated in. A Soldier background is good and all, though these lvl 0 characters are effectively teens about to reach their maturity, so there's need to be self-regulation on how grandiose of what they want versus what is viable. During the lapse between sessions from lvl 0 to lvl 1, sure.., there can be more flare and pizzazz added in, though starting things off a bit more humble also keeps the players more grounded during the early levels, instead of "I, (insert title &/or name) of the (insert corny association's name) hath (done X, Y, & Z)." ...all before/at level 1? I think not. Now this does limit some options though I heavily encourage the players to come up with ways to consider ways that they know each other, be it childhood friends, cousins, fellow students.., whatever that helps tie them in inside/near the starting settlement. Whether they will continue to use that community as where they wish to re-invest into or a launching point once they can handle traveling abroad, it'll give them more to consider instead of the "just passing through" that I used to mostly get otherwise, which its hard to encourage players with wanderlust characters to stick around longer that a single quest that interests them.

[@Swizz12]

Level 1. It's part of your character growing up. It's also part of the DMs job to make things challenging and yet survivable and that is quite easy to get wrong. it makes players think of ways they can get advantage without trying to tank everything. You CAN have a game with level one characters and it can be fun. I will also create nice memories for anyone who survives the first couple of levels (which should be most or all of your party). Stop the power-creep, start at the beginning and turn the pages of your characters exploits one by, so that when they DO get to the dizzy heights of level 8, 10, 12, whatever, they can feel they have truly earned it.

[@derphunk5338]

1:15 "I am a adventurer" is the best line in this video imo. Absolutely floored me. And by that I mean I exhaled though my nose.

[@macoppy6571]

New magic system: the player describes the desired effect, the DM determines the difficulty, roll to cast, but don't roll a 1 ('cuz bad things will happen)

[@shadowmyst9661]

And I’m watching this when I’m just about to start my players on a new campaign at level 1. All they get is basic starting equipment, point buy for stats, and a level 1 feat. But I do intend for the path to level 5 to be relatively quick.

[@ProduccionesPaquito]

At first I thought "oh, what a silly little video, level 1 is not that bad... it's clearly a joke! just get good, lol" Then I remembered our first session of ghosts lf saltmarsh, which starts in a spooky house where critters are waiting to ambush the first player that comes into any room... We lost 6 good characters that day. That session made me make a house rule so that, in case your HP is less than your CON, you get oneshotted if the attack surpasses your current hp+con JUST TO STOP THEM FROM ONLY MAKING BARBARIANS

[@thecoolestofthe834s2]

DONT PLAY MODUALS THEY SUCK omfg every story i hear is that we did this with this shitty modual i gotta be real bro my favorite campaign was when we took rune midgarts from ragnarok online and used it for our dnd world like everything other than my current campaign peak ttrpgs we tried to play curse of strahd and it sucked it was the most railroady pos ever the only good one is tomb of annihilation and that is only because of the tomb mechanics

[@liammeisgood8665]

I love level one and other low levels so while listening here is my argumentative comment. Level one is good because it is scary. You can’t spam powerful spells and even just a couple of hits will easily drop a player in combat. You’re abilities are limited which forces you to rely on strategy and your surroundings much more. This means that your combats feel more interesting instead of meat point arm wrestle. You will have to use movement and ranged options to survive even if it doesn’t do the most damage. Every choice feels that it has risk and consequence. Still a funny video as always even if I don’t agree with it.

[@wickederebus]

What build are you playing where ranged is not optimal? Let me see, I've got a Spell Sniper Warlock, Djinn, Crusher feat making people lethargic and bounce around. I've got an Elven Accuracy Rogue staying far away and using Steady Aim to make her hits land extra hard. Druid using terrain based spells at range to make a death ring that trals enemies. Then snipes at a distance. Wizard, Sorcerer, and Cleric all as Fairy or Bird People abusing flight and ranged cantrips to kill enemies. It has long been part of the art of war to have the greater reach, while being mindful of an enemy getting within your guard/ability to hit.

[@liammeisgood8665]

@@wickederebus my argument was not supposed to come off as “range is bad at high levels” but that the strategy that comes with it is not necessary. Outside of the most hardcore (and often hard to balance) combat tables you can get by perfectly fine by a barbarian or some other meat shield just eating damage and dealing it back. Low level is different because PC’s are more fragile. Edit: after rereading your message my argument was never range is not optimal but that it does not deal as mech damage as just a powerful melee damage dealer. Usually GWM along side other abilities outdoes most other damage methods (many exceptions exist)

[@carlosneto9450]

I actually like the level 1 vibe. And about leveling up, I've been using "sessions required = the level" So, 2 sessions for level 2, 3 sessions for level 3 and so on. At least for low levels, like until level 5

[@opinionofmine3238]

Once, when tried to be "creative" with how I used my spells, my DM told me the spell couldn't be used that way. It was prestidigitation and I was trying to make a bit of the floor wet and slippery. While they might've been correct the spell RAW doesn't do that without some slightly generous interpretation of what constitutes an object, they also told me I could only make something slippery with a spell that explicitly said it like Grease. This example isn't the best case since I might've been trying to use a spell in a way that is not how it actually functions, but I do think many spells are intentionally of very narrow application, and if your DM doesn't allow for flavor-based uses of spells (for example many DMs would say spells to attack can only be used on creatures and only for dealing damage, plus whatever effects you'd normally get out of using RAW) that alone cuts a very significant portion of your options, and even those spells which aren't attacks either make effects that will only be able to be used creatively under extremely specific circumstances (maybe there's some creative uses for a goodberry in 1/1000000 campaigns, but otherwise it's only getting used the normal way) or are themselves spells which are meant for creativity but can still be relatively niche unless you know in advance that they will be in a compatible environment. And that's assuming you even have spells. Don't get me wrong, limits breed creativity, but playing a mute deaf character with no special abilities or magic of any sort that's paralyzed from the waste down might breed a creative solution for a problem, but it's a problem that A) doesn't need to be there and B) doesn't contribute to fun. The threshold at which one finds (B) to apply may be different between people, but it's valid whether you're talking something as extreme as the example I just gave or if you're talking about being a desert-sheet level 1. The examples in media you gave are cherry picked, I would argue (maybe except for the Green Knight one), but not from stories, but within their own story. Sure, Harry Potter didn't start out knowing many spells, but he does learn spells from a far more flexible and comparably powerful system of magic and the difference between knowing a new spell or not is not going through an epic quest to get a level, it's closer to whether he did his homework that day. Yeah Frodo and Sam could be (probably mistakenly, but for the sake of argument) be described as level 1 characters.... but you can't forget the rest of the cast without whom they would've been quite dead. Using Lord of the RIngs as an example would either imply an escort of much more powerful NPCs or a party that is highly imbalanced in levels, if we assume Frodo and Sam are level 1, rather than maybe just characters who aren't particularly combat-oriented or something like that. Even ignoring perfection incarnate, I mean, Legolas, is even Gimli really level 1? Really? And setting aside all the previous, level 1 can pigeonhole players into certain kinds of characters, as the flavor possibilities are considerably narrowed when you only have the most basic features of a class to work off of, including in most cases the absence of a subclass, which can represent such a massive shift as to make the transition borderline nonsensical by the time you do climb up to it. Backstory and character type are both limited in a way that is, as I brought up before, both unnecessary and quite possibly not fun. Level 1 works mainly in two circumstances: If what a level 1 character is is what you wanted to play anyway, or if you don't care what you play. Neither of those is a "wrong" way to enjoy the game of course, there's nothing wrong with liking to play weaker characters or characters with less options trying to use wits and creativity to achieve things beyond their station, or to deal with smaller and more mundane problems, nor is there something wrong with being flexible or liking the challenge of trying to figure out what to do given restrictions. But I do think these are two specific ways to play and not a generally applicable sentiment.

[@UnNuclear]

This video was a wild ride of me agreeing with you and then being confused over and over again.

[@GutsGrassesOn]

Pathfinder 2e fixes this

[@JazzJackrabbit]

Nope, they don't

[@nonenone-hv5iq]

@@JazzJackrabbityeah? The numbers work such that level 1 characters are still porportionally strong for their threats, and combat isn’t one crit and you die. And you get cool stuff to do right from level one.

[@TheMightyBattleSquid]

Discuss dnd without bringing up pathfinder challenge (impossible)

[@HungryHungryShoggoth]

Hard disagree, low level D&D is the best D&D. There's a reason lvl 0 funnels are so popular in games like DCC and E6 exists in 3.5. But to each their own

[@DareMurdok]

Counterpoint: What if you had 6 level 1 characters you switched out like pokemon

[@MatrixQ]

Now starting at level 20 is a bit much probably. :D At the same time, I played so many games from levels 1 to 10, that I'm kind of fed up with always looking at the cool stuff my character might eventually do but never getting there. Starting a game at level 10 would definitely be more interesting for me.

[@badmojo0777]

level 1 is a one shot, first session expeirence. when the game ends, LEVEL UP, onto level 2

[@jakelevinson7802]

I kind of like low level combat for someone who’s been doing higher level, but for a bit there’s a weird beauty in the vulnerability, especially when they’re new characters that people are not as invested in. Although it’s a fundamentally different play style and I don’t know if I prefer it, it’s just very refreshing for me to do it for the first time in a very, very long time.😊

[@Tovec8]

I didn't realize it was April 1st again so soon.

[@biffstrong1079]

I love level one. When we started it was one spell at first level and a couple daggers that I threw that kept sticking in the fighters back.

[@CornBreadtm1]

I'm contractually obligated to start at any level that will give me access to fireball. I don't like missing, it makes me sad.

[@morganbiddlecom]

Does anyone feel like Logan got into an argument with someone who actually hates level one and is making fun of that person?

[@BurningTNT]

This might just be how our group plays where we don’t have that many encounters in one day but I find the higher level you get to the less people hit the floor. The enemies may be hitting harder but something about the combination of more hp, probably better AC and bigger spells for bigger damage means that the damage the party takes can’t keep up with the rate they gain hp. Could be down to things like not enough encounters per day or not enough minions vs one big creature, but as we saw recently a well placed aoe spell can nullify the enemies numbers advantage real quick. It’s why I like when encounters have secondary stakes that are more likely to cause problems. A villain teleporting away, the noise of a thunderwave attracting guards you were trying to avoid, not reaching someone in peril in time, all those good narrative stakes.

[@guidomista3570]

There's a very good reason why my group always starts at level 3

[@watkmo]

Timely Just started my first ever campaign & we're all level 1 chumps. The only 'combat' was our goblin wizard shaking a rooster that woke them up, and then later using Mind Sliver to kill a rat while scavenging for food (who needs rations?) I think I'll get to hit something next session, and at least I have Second Wind if I lose HP😅 😅

[@justsomejerseydevilwithint4606]

If anything, level 3(at least in 5e) seems to be where the game actually starts. You get a subclass, some extra skills/feats based on it, and even Ranger gets a fucking leopard or something, or at least ensnaring strike. You start getting access to what your class is all about. It's like after you beat Gargoyles in Dark Souls 1; you've got enough experience and access to gear to actually see your class flesh out. Except DnD isn't supposed to be Dark Souls. I'd say with new players, maybe do a session 0 at level one, kill a rat in the chef's basement or something, but l would suggest DMs in 5e start your players off at lvl 3.

[@nyromath2195]

Now to watch this video on an endless loop alternating between this one and Jacob's "Level 20 is dumb" video

[@ianyoder2537]

For me as a DM the starting point is level 3. They're still low level and in a world full of danger but they've got enough tools to at least escape. Not to mention you don't have to deal with back story issues of having a wizard who spend years at a magic school to only cast 2 spells and not have a sub class chosen.

[@tylerkarnes2947]

I personally think that there is a lot of fun to be had at level 1… in other editions and games. 5e is horridly designed for low level things and also very high level things. It’s weird.

[@celspade]

I just starting dming my second ever campaign, and my first campaign online. I feel like starting at level one for my party was alright, since most of them were either just religious townsfolk (the paladin) or people doing stuff you'd see commoner npcs doing, with maybe one character who could maybe start out at level 2 but was overall fitting for lvl1. I have 5 players so I can throw a certain amount of stuff at them at lvl 1 and they won't die. They reached lvl 2 last session and will start fighting some heavier battles, but I feel like the level 1 stage was good to have.

[@celspade]

due to their level, they're doing combat in and around the city. If combat is taking a while due to low rolls or is taking a bad turn the city guard can reasonably show up due to the commotion with 1-2 NPCs to bolster the party's numbers

[@itsavalon]

I run games with the gritty realism rest rules and with a very very low magic setting. Not everyone is into those kinds of games, but I get players who are, and we have fun. Low levels are for learning about who you want to be, it’s the beginning of the heros journey. The issue is that players get too caught up in the end game, and forget about the journey to it. Not everyone will love low level games, but it’s 100% mindset.

[@michaelclark6941]

I'm about to start adventurers league, so this hits home.

[@ArcaneKeeperD20]

Great stuff! Thank you for sharing ❤

[@ClockworkOuroborous]

Am I experiencing some sort of time warp, or is today April 1st and not July 25th? Or maybe... just maybe... this is that "tongue in cheek" thing I've heard those Millenials are into.

[@Bobin22]

I made the catastrophic mistake of using milestone as my level up system in Rime of the Frostmaiden and assigned those level-ups to doing the quests in the towns. My characters are like 8 sessions in and level 2 because they keep intentionally avoiding the quests trying to pull one over on me while unbeknownst to them they’re just pranking themselves.

[@powerdark98]

Bro was that Gothic' 1 scavenger noise at the beginning?? if so NOICE!!