I admit it, I'm a low level freak!

[GhostWolf69]

Just wanted to get this off my chest, and maybe get some comforting hints that I'm not alone in this.

I love to play at low levels.

There, now it is out in the open.

it has always been a trait of mine. I love the danger of few HP.
I love the struggle with close to NO magic assistance.
I love the down to earth / common sense scenarios at low leves.
And I just adore the low "book keeping" involved. Since character are still basic and you know mostly everything by heart.

Is it just me?.... :roll:

/wolf

 

[Garet]

I really like playing lowlevel also. We started a new lowlevel dnd/swashbuckers game a month ago. its been a blast. just now 2nd level after 3 games
Most people i play with like the high levels, but they play the numbers game. 4 levels of this 2 levels of that etc. I like high level also, got a 24th level Ranger thats a kick to play. I'll smack a kobold for you.

waves the low level flag 8)

 

[DrSkull]

I like lower level play too.

My problem with higher levels is that it gets to the point where player characters can ignore whole armies of NPC's. To be sure, Conan fought up to 20 guys single-handedly, but not on purpose. He never said, it'll take me a minute or two to hack through all 100 of the wizard's followers, then I'll get him.

We played a D&D game once where are characters were supposed to be leading a small army, but we ended up sending it home, we could do the job ourselves with less fuss.

It's hard to have a stealthy robbery mission be exiciting, when the PC's could just kill the entire town guard in a stand-up fight.

In D&D, to combat this problem, I made my default level for ordinary NPC's be 4th. A 4th level commoner still sucks, but a 4th level warrior has a chance to inflict a hit on a high level PC, and might last through a sword hit, and survive a fireball, if he makes a save.

Sorry, I get into a rut when I think about this.

 

[Yokiboy]

I'm totally with you Wolf, I lose interest in high level campaigns. Now I am only speaking from experience with D&D and AD&D, not Conan. Conan will probably work out much better, with the lower HP values, Massive Damage rules, and especially less magic!

I find that by level 10 or so, combats start taking forever with all the logistics of tracking spell effects, ranges, saves, bonuses, penalties, etc. ad nauseum! :x

I hope Conan will prove a more playable game at higher levels, as my players seem to love having high level characters.

TTFN,

Yokiboy

 

[Yokiboy]

Sorry, I get into a rut when I think about this.

LOL! :lol: I am so with you on this. I am DM'ing my highest level campaign ever, and am considering TPKs at every corner. :twisted:

TTFN,

Yokiboy

 

[wyerdo]

Again, speaking from DND experience, I find that my favorite levels are between 3rd-8th level.

Below third, I find that my players die too easily and make no bold choices, and above 8th players start getting too powerful to make good challenges for them anymore.

 

[sanseveria]

GhostWolf69 said:

it has always been a trait of mine. I love the danger of few HP.
I love the struggle with close to NO magic assistance.
I love the down to earth / common sense scenarios at low leves.
And I just adore the low "book keeping" involved. Since character are still basic and you know mostly everything by heart.

I would add: " I love running for my life with my tail tucked between my legs, because of my inability to cause damage of any measurable worth."

That was my Thief by the way... Not very bright.

But seriously, I agree, low levels rock! for both the players and also for the DM.

SS

 

[charliebananas]

Why not cap hit points so that after a certain level your characters no longer gain hit dice just CON bonus! :twisted:

i know this doesn't solve all the problems with high level characters, but it should add an element of danger, while keeping players interested.

 

[Johannixx]

I love the variety of options high-level characters get, but I like the danger and accountability inherent in low-level games. Thus, I'm tempted to double everyone's feats, but limit them to 10th level

 

[Infidel-X]

I love the variety of options high-level characters get, but I like the danger and accountability inherent in low-level games. Thus, I'm tempted to double everyone's feats, but limit them to 10th level

I agree 100%. I have learned through many years of play that with the right effort on the part of the Ref/GM that danger and accountability doesn't stop once a character reaches a certain level. I've played in great games where my character was in the 15th-20th levels and I felt like I was just as challenged as a 1st-5th level character.

 

[Orkin]

What about calculating or estimating your own actual abilities and plating as if you were really up against that world? That would be frightening!

 

[Anonymous]

What about calculating or estimating your own actual abilities and plating as if you were really up against that world? That would be frightening!

TimeLordsis the only game I've ever read that had objective measures for doing just that! You WERE your character and you were statted out by completting a questionaire that the rest of the players had to agree to.

The Strength section had thing like do as many pushups as you can. For every x pushups, get +1 to your Str score and things like that. My favorite one was: If you can juggle, add +3 to DEX.

 

[Elaith the Serpant]

I quite like low level gaming, and when i am DM (GM what ever) i am quite stingy with exp, esspiecially with new players, so that each player learns what his charectar is capable of at that level before progressing to the next.

Not that high levels aren't good, i just think that players should know what they can do before they get to those lofty heights

 

[Yokiboy]

I quite like low level gaming, and when i am DM (GM what ever) i am quite stingy with exp, esspiecially with new players, so that each player learns what his charectar is capable of at that level before progressing to the next.

Not that high levels aren't good, i just think that players should know what they can do before they get to those lofty heights

This is an excellent point Elaith, I have to agree with you. I have a tendency to forget about this though, but I should just detain some player characters a level or two until they get it.

TTFN,

Yokiboy

 

[Yuan-Ti]

Low-level rocks.

 

[Grim Wanderer]

Oh yeah! The lower levels are where the action is. Personally I cut the number of hit points in half at each level and increase the XP needed to attain each level. I always hated having to use a +30 sword of devine damage to inflict even the smallest scratch on those 15th+ level character games.

Grim Wanderer

 

[Yuan-Ti]

Oh yeah! The lower levels are where the action is. Personally I cut the number of hit points in half at each level and increase the XP needed to attain each level. I always hated having to use a +30 sword of devine damage to inflict even the smallest scratch on those 15th+ level character games.

Grim Wanderer

Awww, maaaaan! You killed my low-level buzz. Why do you have to be such a buzzkill? :wink:

 

[GhostWolf69]

Stop me if I'm wrong but have I stumbled upon a common denominator (sp?) for "Conan RPG" fans? I had a feeling this could be the case since Conan has a very "low-level" feel to it, even when it isn't... (Hope that made sense :shock: )

/wolf

 

[Grim Wanderer]

The thing about Conan in general is that there was always a life and death feel to it. Even at the height of his power Conan took every battle seriously. That is the feeling I get with the lower level games, combat should be DANGEROUS, even at high levels and even if your foe is of a lesser level.

I mean, how many times have you played dnd at the high levels and the DM says there is a horde of Kobalds charging you and the PCs laugh, then three sit down to have lunch while the "battle" goes on. zzzzzzz.

Grim Wanderer

 

[Yokiboy]

The thing about Conan in general is that there was always a life and death feel to it. Even at the height of his power Conan took every battle seriously. That is the feeling I get with the lower level games, combat should be DANGEROUS, even at high levels and even if your foe is of a lesser level.

Wolf and I were talking about this the other day, and started asking ourselves what would happen if we tried the d20 Modern rules regarding Massive Damage tresholds; i.e. them being equal to Con.

That would have most Commoners having a Massive Damage threshold of 10! While PCs would average a bit higher. Perhaps this would simply lead to Con becoming much more important as an ability, but it would be kind of fun IMO. Worth a shot at least.

TTFN,

Yokiboy