Topic: Starting Level

[Kristen Mork]

Which is what? 6 maybe? Wolf boy, 4? Kids aren't my strong point, I won't claim to know. I'm pretty sure it's younger and greener than "1st level young adult" though.

I've had many games in which the characters (at least via Flashback) started out as 12-13 year-old 0-level characters.  It's a great way to establish party unity (you grew up together!) and backstory (the 8-year-old who you helped out all those years ago is now an attractive 16-year-old!).

[rdanhenry]

Tarzan killed a full-grown bull gorilla when he was 10. I think he was more than first level by then... but Tarzan is essentially a mythic character and they don't follow the same laws of time as more realistic characters.

It is going to vary a lot by culture. As long as there is double-development for 1st level, there's still room for 0-level children of lower age. You can also have extraordinary young but capable individuals if it fits the setting and situation. In most cases, the advantages of youth will be balanced by disadvantages (it's hard to be taken seriously if you're 13 and everyone else is around 20, nevermind the 40-something mayor/king/merchant).

[pastaav]

I think at what point a character passes from level 0 to level 1 is totally dependent on circumstances. If the character has been living on the streets since he was five years old then I can't see why he would not have gained a couple of levels when he turns twelve. I would also except the character to have a number of flaws based on horrible stuff that has happened. The same character in a regular family would probably not have reached level 1.

Another matter is the difficulty to surviving level 1. I would say this depends very much on assumptions about the general population. If most NPCs are also level 1 then I can't see why it would be tricky to survive, but why would NPCs never gain levels? If we go with the notation that level 1 characters are squires and similar then it also follows that the typical opposition for the level 1 characters are characters of much higher level.

[Marc R]

When you have someone sprung fully competent at 8, people notice. . .they call them Prodigies. It's entirely possible, especially with PCs being often of the 1% cream of the crop, but Mozart is not the generic baseline of musical talent competence in reference to age and experience, he's an exception.

PCs are often those exceptions, but not always, and by definition the majority of people are not exceptions.

[GrumpyOldFart]

Yeah, that. Which means the chargen process has to allow for the minimum possible skill in an NPC, and yet at the same time allow for a beginning PC to not only be several years beyond that point, but at least slightly 'Mozart-ish' into the bargain. Either that or you need 2 different chargen systems for NPCs and PC, and have the 2 never mix.

I think at what point a character passes from level 0 to level 1 is totally dependent on circumstances. If the character has been living on the streets since he was five years old then I can't see why he would not have gained a couple of levels when he turns twelve. I would also except the character to have a number of flaws based on horrible stuff that has happened. The same character in a regular family would probably not have reached level 1.

Sure. That kid would probably be 0 level before he was 6, 1st level before 9. That's why I figured 0 level was

...the minimum age/experience you could ever see a kid operating independently of his parents and surviving.

In other words, I'm trying to define it as "barely skilled enough to keep from starving to death" rather than as anything connected to what age you are. On a somewhat related note, that's why I always had a major problem with starting ages in general and for elf characters in particular. This guy only learned up to level one worth of skills in 75 years? Really?

 

[Marc R]

It's the SD penalty, they spend a lot of time drinking and sniffing flowers.

[markc]

  IMHO to define what is skilled or unskilled you need to define some sort of skill rank (level or number, ie 10 ranks is apprentice) and/or a skill bonus value (to handle those who have better stats than the average +0 stat person)
  If you do the above then Mark R's "Prodigies" may not match My (Mark C) definition of "Prodigies". For example using RMSS an apprentice would have a skill of around 50, and then it would go up from there. Which is 10 ranks without stat bonuses.
  Also the benefit of RMSS/FRP IMHO is you have a lot more areas to place DP and the GM can limit them to specific areas if you are playing a game that start at lower ages.
  IMHO also if playing at lower ages you would strip out the Adol and App "levels" and have the player create these themselves with specific limitations based on background info (or rolled random from a custom chart) to help define what they could spend DP on.
MDC 

[yammahoper]

I think it is fair to say most souls, including NPC's, are drawn to jobs/skill sets for which they have a stat bonus.  I assume a +5 to +15.

[Marc R]

True, as long as you have job options, when it's "Serf or landless criminal" many people choose "serf".

[yammahoper]

True, as long as you have job options, when it's "Serf or landless criminal" many people choose "serf".

If the serfs only exceptional stat is St, them he will be a manual labor serf.  If it's Pr, he will work in the manor.

[markc]

  I forgot to mention that I do not require my NPC's or PC's to have 90's in their Prime Stats. In fact I often run games where they do not have starting vales of 90's there and I also often use a lower random method to generate stat points. Such as 450 +10d10(oe).
  the above can have a big difference in how the game is played and on how normal people are represented in your game.
MDC

[Marc R]

True, as long as you have job options, when it's "Serf or landless criminal" many people choose "serf".

If the serfs only exceptional stat is St, them he will be a manual labor serf.  If it's Pr, he will work in the manor.

LOL, laugh point.

[Usdrothek]

that's why I always had a major problem with starting ages in general and for elf characters in particular. This guy only learned up to level one worth of skills in 75 years? Really?

 

The passing of time means nothing to an elf. 75 years? Bah! I'll learn that next century. If anything, elven PCs are the exception in that they are too focussed on achieving goals in a human time scale.

[GrumpyOldFart]

I'm not thinking in terms of focus, I'm thinking that mere existence teaches you things. Otherwise why would cultural/adolescent ranks cost 0 DPs? Only getting to 1st level in 75 years makes me wonder if the guy has been hanging on a peg in a dark room all that time.

...they spend a lot of time drinking and sniffing flowers.

which should at least teach you a lot about the effects of drunkenness, the psychology of drunks, and a fair amount of botanical trivia.

[yammahoper]

ya know, I have some, uh, good advice, yeah, thats it...on how to deal with elves...

[Marc R]

On one hand it's a fluff stat "Lifespan immortal"  means you can make them as old as you want. . .there's no rule I can think of defining the ages of childhood and adolescence for elves. Does it exist anywhere in the books? Just because you're immortal doesn't mean you weren't 18 once.

On the other hand it's game balance. Pushing up their skills to a common sense even sheltered and lazy 75 year old would make them more than 1st level. Then it means if you start off at 1st level you can't play an Elf or Dwarf, and some people want to. . .so in order to make it possible, it's possible.

The GM can choose to apply as much common sense as they want, that's usually how game worlds start. . .and then house rules. . .like "You have to be at least 5th level to be an elf" or whatever the GM feels fits their world's common sense.

[smug]

More than anything, I'd say the discussion demonstrates that the level system isn't always a happy match with the skill system. The limit to the number of ranks of most skills which can be acquired in a given level requires a fairly high level to have a high skill, given normal human/PC race stats, which in some respects is rather unfortunate. You can fix it with freebie ranks (even easier if it's a secondary skill) but that might be too ad-hoc for some/most people.

[rdanhenry]

I start Elves at 25, which is still rather slow development, but a lot more plausible than 75.

[GrumpyOldFart]

I just houseruled that elves age at roughly the same rate as humans up to puberty, slowing afterward until the aging process effectively stops at around age 25. So okay, starting age is roughly the same as for humans.

As for trying to balance the immortality... I don't see it as an advantage. How many adventurers, of any race, ever live to be old? I consider it a moot point.

[markc]

I start Elves at 25, which is still rather slow development, but a lot more plausible than 75.

 25th level? Rather than 75th level?
MDC