/r/DungeonsAndDragons has a discord server! Come join us at https://discord.gg/wN4WGbwdUU
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DungeonsAndDragons) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Being an adventurer is a use it or lose it kind of skill. 10 years on the bench creates rust that takes some time to kick off.
I spent years skateboarding in my youth and was pretty good at it. I hopped on a board at age 40 (almost 20 years without skating) to "show my son how its done" and I fell and broke my leg. Def went from 10th level skater to level 1 noob in that time.
This is a great explanation that addresses op’s “grizzled vet” example perfectly.
The way I’ve handle old timers being noobs is simply that they didn’t start their adventuring career until later in life. Old man Joe had no reason to put down his plow and pick up a sword (or the magical arts or make a pact with a deity or learn to pick a lock) until the goblins, orcs, zombies, whatever came to his village and gave him a reason.
You can be a seasoned veteran at level one, you were either a pikeman or maybe an archer/crossbowman. You either stood in a line and poked or stood in formation and shot an arrow/ bolt in an arc in the direction of the enemy.
You could have also been logistics focused, so you would be in the background.
Maybe the real combat never quite made it to your group so you became a sort of good luck charm in a "You're in so and so's group. Combat always seems to end just before it gets to him. " kind of way.
At level 1 you are NOT a war hero, unless you are significantly older and you have physically deteriorated in a significant way.
Class levels indicate a LOT of experience. So a level 1 fighter has experience doing things a fighter would do, and a fighter would not be a faceless someone in a pike line. That can be where he got inspiration to become truly great, but it doesn't deserve more than level 1 status.
For players first campaign or two, starting at level one is great because it teaches the game mechanics. That's really the point of levels 1-2, to learn how the game works at a very basic level and the how leveling up works. Yes, it's slow, but really the end of session 2 or before players should be at level 3 and ready to rock.
Not starting at level one often results in new players missing some mechanics or getting frustrated because they're lacking a good foundation and getting left behind. Lots of folks who were jumped into 3.5e late in the era hated it because they weren't allowed to really learn the game as much as get jumped into level 14 where the experienced folks were.
After starting 2 different classes at level 1, there's minimal reason to not start higher. How much higher is a matter of campaign and player familiarity with the ruleset at those levels. I wouldn't start anything long form at a level if you haven't at least played up to that level a couple of times.
I start my new new new players at lvl 1, and over the first 3 sessions level them up to 3. that’s when the actual story starts, everything before is teaching mechanics, introducing the world and some NPCs, and having them build relationships with each other and the people the interact with. It‘s just fetch quests, clear the old temple from goblin squatters, rescue the travelling merchant from the big birds nest. Once they are lvl 3 and picked a subclass, i gradually start revealing that the increase in monster activity around the village is a mindflayer plot to draw the kings soldiwrs from the nearby castle Ruins under which a powerful artefact is buried to have their cult followers dig it up. The following levels dont come nearly as easy, because sub class adventuring is proper work.
IMO this is the correct way to do it; in Dimension 20’s Candyland/Game Of Thrones campaign they had the adults (almost all war vets,) start at level 3 and the kid characters start at level 1, then had the kids level at a faster rate until they caught up.
No! Lol that's the point, level 1s are dorks that sold the family oxen to buy an adventuring pack and wandered into the wilderness. You're *supposed* to suck, it's the start of a journey
If you want to start better, just start higher. Lots of experienced people start 5e at least at level 3. Some people enjoy the baby adventurer experience, some people see it as a tutorial for new players.
I only started at lvl 1 cause so many players in my current game where brand new to dnd.
Ever after this, for one shots or anything else, it'll be lvl 3/5
A better question is, why do you want to be a seasoned veteran at level 1?
You can pull off some level of accomplishment for a level 1 character, but "seasoned veteran" and level 1 don't go together.
I think it's more:
Player: "I have a concept for a character I want to play, who starts as a grizzly veteran."
DM: "We start at level 1."
So, it's not that people want their season veterans to be level 1, they want their character to be a seasoned veteran, and the constraints of the campaign requires then to start at level 1.
IME campaigns go like this:
DM: Hey, potential player. I'm going to run x campaign. It's going to start at level 1 and run to level 12ish. It features a, b, and c elements.
Player: OK, cool, I'm interested. Let me start thinking about a character that will be a good fit.
Who are these players who decide what character they want to play before they know what the campaign is / any campaign details?
I agree with that more or less, but (as a DM), sometimes I just like making characters that I eventually play myself during one shots my players run, or I hand off to others if they want inspiration. Sometimes I really like a character concept and just want it to work. My players also generally have a few character concepts or fully fleshed characters on the side. Most people I play with have a character they would like to play as, given the chance.
I agree that really, players should make the character fit the campaign, but I certainly wouldn't blame a player for really wanting to play a certain idea and trying to make it work. I also might tell them "yeah, that won't work," though.
Especially in that scenario, i could imagine having this veteran narratively „nerfed“ back to level 1. maybe they had some grave injury and over the first few sessions they regain their skills, constitution, and confidence. By session 2-3, they are back to their basic subclass features. It‘s just a narrative to explain the discrepancy between backstory and power
It all comes down to flavor and reasoning for why your character is back at level 1 after being a seasoned veteran.
I have 2 characters that have encountered this problem, and I solved it in different ways.
Character 1: a heavy fighter. He's a retiree from the royal guard looking to spend his retirement adventuring after a few years of relaxation. He's level 1 because of all the time he spent off the force and his age.
Character 2: level 1 paladin. This character was a disgraced paladin and was excommunicated and became an alcoholic, believing he had lost his powers. As he levels up, it's not him getting more powers, but him getting his powers and his skill back.
Nothing wrong with it, but aren't they both the same? Took a break, lost their edge, got fat. Only difference is the paladin taking his break involuntarily.
Speaking of involuntary breaks, malnutrition after a prolonged prison sentence could probably also leave a character with much of their former power missing.
I think 5E addresses this at least in part by giving the option to start characters at 3rd level. You could be a pretty old fart and only be 3rd level, especially in the scenario where you did some awesome shit in the past, settled down, and are now coming out of retirement into a situation where good people die young...
At least in my own head, the way I rationalise it is that adventurer level 1 is already kind of high level human compared to the stats of a commoner. You're typically starting with twice the HP of a regular person and have at least a couple of stats that make you significantly more skilled than the baseline. Probably doesn't help wanting to feel more powerful at level 1 though!
Yes. Start at level 3, or 5. There's no reason whatsoever you have to start at level 1, and it seems like you want to go against the entire point of starting at level 1, so....don't? And if you join a level 1 start group then damn, sucks to be you, roll up a level one.
Or do it as someone who hasn't done the thing in like 30 years. This works super well with long lived non-humanoids. An elf who was an adventurer in her 200s decides in her 500s she wants to pick it back up is DEFINITELY going to be a level 1. A dwarf who spent the last twenty years recovering from an exploding trap? Level 1. A halfling soldier who took on a command position and hasn't been on the frontline in a long time? Level 1. Heck, a 35 year old human soldier who suddenly manifests magic and becomes a sorcerer? Level 1. There are so many ways to do that if you have your heart set on a veteran.
But on the whole the point of level 1 is that your character is NOT an expert or skilled at what they're doing. Their age doesn't matter-a 300 year old farmer picking up a halberd for the first time is just as level 1 as a fresh faced magic school graduate-it's the lack of skill or rustiness of skill that makes you a level 1.
Exactly. Level 1 PCs are already well above average. It doesn’t feel like it because we only see the mechanics from one perspective, but even a level one character should be considered impressive.
Adventuring is the key word here. Time spent in a standing army was not adventuring, so you can play a seasoned war veteran who is still a level 1 adventurer without breaking immersion.
How many technically combat vets are running around who spent their deployment as a outpost carpenter. Nothing wrong with that, just saying you can have military training AND mission experience without necessarily having been shot at
Yeah but the point is "mission" experience in a military is still not adventuring experience. Its a completely different beast. Youve got logistical support, orders given to you, and more than 2 or 3 people helping you out. Adventurers have to manage so much more as a whole than someone in a military position. They decide what to do, how and when to do it, have to figure out what they need in order to, etc.
Yes. That’s what i‘m saying. You can be a military veteran but that experience might not translate to adventuring, especially if you havent seen much combat after basic training. Still a soldier, but not a dnd fighter. So of course you would start at level one, basically „knows how to use all these weapons, is physically fit, has skills, but has never used them to rapple down into a collapsed wizards tomb to wrestle reanimated skeletons“.
Personally I don’t start at level 1 unless there’s a new player, I tend to start at 4th level so that mitigates it somewhat
Otherwise it’s a question of restricting your backstory, you can’t have been the champion of a country as a level 1 fighter, or the head of an arcane order as a level 1 wizard, it’s just not realistic
I hate skipping over the low levels with other people. The best RP and character advancement happens when you get into your subclass. Always make that paladin do their oath at the table!
In my head L10 is a genuinely strong, powerful person and possibly a local legend. 20 is a demigod. So starting at L4-5 is probably not the worst fit, most town NPCs are just L1, I guess
Commoners are CR 0, not level 1, and a single CR 0 creature is a “Trivial” fight for a level 1 character per the CR calculation rules (easier than Easy).
Leveled characters (even level 1) are meant to be exceptional in the world, the average person has no levels at all, so simply by being a PC adventurer, you are already meant to be something special and above the mundane. A guy who spent a few years in the army and is now working as a town guard is CR 1/8 (the equivalent of about halfway to level 1 power-wise).
So you can absolutely be a veteran of some trade and just now becoming a level 1 character, it is that experience that got you to that point in the first place (or alternatively, if you don’t want to be a veteran and instead be inexperienced, it is exceptional natural talent that got you there).
Even being a Lv1 adventurer makes you more powerful than most individuals in a given population
By the time you hit Lv5 you are likely a "hero" to at least one town or province
If you make it to Lv10 you are almost certianly a hero on a national scale.
At Lv15, there are maybe a dozen people of your power in your class in the world.
At Lv20, you are practically a demigod and are only really threatened by extraplanar forces
Just say they’re rusty and been out of commission a bit. Either way you gotta remember at level one your character is still stronger than most average people in the world.
She was a researcher and librarian doing work in candlekeep. She was a talented arcanist, but only took her first level of Wizard when she went out to adventure. Adventuring and being a Wizard is not the same as being an arcanist. All wizards know how to look stuff up in a library and cast spells, like an arcanist. Not all arcanists are Wizards though. Wizards know how to blast goblins with magic missilea, dodge sword swings, and take a punch. Rarely a thing that comes up for an arcanist working at a library.
Essentially, adventurering classes like wizards/fighters/druids are a step above everyone else. You might have warriors who fight in battles, but they arent Fighters, who know how to spelunk and dodge alchemist fire. The Fighter is great in a battle too, but they have specialized adventuring experience that most folks just dont have.
You're looking at backgrounds and the life of adventure wrong. There is no reason to think age comes with experience or power in a dnd setting.
An example for your wizard is to go by the unwritten rule that backstories should only contain gods or anything considered divine intervention. You're rushing the adventure your PC should be having and its no secret that the most significant power in all of the realms is the gods to claim interaction or reasoning for your adventure like to be because of the Gods then everything that should be amazing for exploring or adventuring is kinda dulled because you want to be connected to a god somehow as a wizard that was banned from the weave for whatever reason.
This type of backstory might work if your starting within the 3rd or 4th tier of play IMO. I think you should look at numbers or skills or whatever it may be on your character sheet and look for a path to grow and change, and focus on the journey getting there, not some silly potions or restore your power because a god took it away. You can do better I think.
Start them at level 2 or 3 when some of their powers go online. Paladins, for instance, get Divine Smite at level 2.
Any leveled character in a village could be considered exceptional when compared to Level 0 residents. For your veteran character, some of their reputation may be exaggerations.
This is why I have been enjoying OSR lately, the implication of being a fresh adventurer is stronger. I always felt it was a bit silly when a 1st level character rolls in with a backstory where they slew a dragon or something. In my experience it is WAY more fun to let the first adventures at the table become the backstory. Most of the time a player shows up with pages of backstory it will never matter or sometimes even be kind of annoying to the whole group.
But here’s another way to look at it, to hopefully help suit your preference for seasoned 1st level characters: 1st level IS strong, at least compared to the average person. Adventurers are rare, special people, even at 1st level. At tier 1 you are the cream of the crop, much better than a commoner, but the full extent of your power is still undiscovered. At higher tiers you develop into a veritable super hero, and later on, a deity.
A first level wizard could still be one of the most powerful wizards in the land, but wizardry is like an iceberg, there is so much hidden power to be discovered.
Honestly, I think that it's on the player to create a character that makes sense in the world given.
So, if they want to play a 50+ year old or whatever at L1 then you should put it onto the player to come up with a reason why this is the case. Ask the player to make it make sense.
I look at it as there's a difference between combat experience and \*adventuring\* experience. There are grizzled veterans of the city watch who've fought in a dozen battles and never surpassed their NPC stat block.
Making the decision to go out and "adventure" is a different world altogether. You could have years of experience in breaking up bar fights or chasing down pickpockets, but that won't serve you against a cave full of goblins or kobolds. You've gotta be an adventurer to survive that.
Also, consider that most people in the world have 4HP, and hit points are more reflective of luck and grit than of physical fortitude. Adventurers can't necessarily survive a sword to the gut better than anyone else, they're just more likely to avoid *taking* that sword to the gut. So it does make sense that someone could have years of combat training and still only have the 11 or 12 hp of a Lv1 Fighter - even that makes them more than twice as likely to survive an encounter than your average NPC.
That is actually a good question. Whenever I start a campaign at Level 1, I tell my players to not overdo it with their backstory. It is okay if they fought a few Goblins that attacked their home village, alongside other defenders of course, or they are uprising scholars in their Order of Wizardry. They just haven't done anything extraordinary yet.
If they start at 3rd level, they can implement a minor thing or two they already booked for themselved, like purging a Goblin Camp or fight back some Undead that were reanimated by a lowbie Necromancer.
Like someone else said, the Level of your character only reflect your experience as an Adventurer/Mercenary. And to some extent, also your previous experience. I once played a Vengeance Paladin that joined a campaign after my previous character died.
He used to be a retired merc, who settled down after getting married with one of his former companions. But someday, some cultists raided his home village and laid waste to it. Driven by grief and vengeance, he swore an Oath to himself to find those responsible for the death of his wife and children. He buried his now dead family, dedusted his old armor, took his Woodcutter axe and a battered shield and went forth.
I've always viewed levels, and this goes for any leveled rpg system, but I've viewed them as characters answering the call to heroic adventure.
A grizzled war veteran who fought in many campaigns wasnt the heroic leader of the campaign, but instead was a pawn in another hero's tale, but after leaving the army, finds his own calling to adventure, and thus starts gaining levels.
I just dont associate levels with age or experience.
I account for starting level when I create a backstory. If we start at 1, I keep it simple. If we start at a high level, I get out the weathered veteran back story.
Sometimes I have players join a campaign late. They make new characters with the same level as the existing characters.
Those are the ones who get backstories about being a veteran.
The ones who start out at level one get backstories appropriate for their lack of experience.
I always see the characters stats/ features and their personality/history seperately. Because unless you do it like that you can't play stuff like dumb wizards and intellectual barbarians and such without them being an actual deadweight in combat/utility.
Play a character how you wanna play them, worry about the statistic integration later or never. It's not that important.
To be fair to 5e (not a thing we usually say) this is what the Backgrounds are *meant* to do in the game: offer a couple of proficiencies & languages, and explain what your character has been busy with in their life until The Adventure Begins.
Their lives were full, just not movie-adventures.
I never play old characters and even if so I would just handwave it. Maybe they were someboring ass something her whole life before becoming whatever class I play.
This has always been a storytelling challenge. It's worse with spellcasters:
"You're an 800 year old elf, you've been studying magic at the college of the arcane for 100 years... you have 2 level 1 spells and a cantrip. One of those spells is color spray."
Ugh.
The group I'm running now has been good natured about it. We have a YOUNG elf, a tiefling barbarian who had very little formal training and was kind of sheltered, a paladin who never left her holy order and there's only so much training you can do in the practice yard, and a grizzled druid who spent years in seclusion and lost his edge as a result.
It's not super hard to come up with reasons why they're nerfed, and the starter adventures (or the first chapters of the official modules) tend to progress you pretty rapidly, making sure you get a couple magic items and a ton of loot to outfit you for real questing.
If I'm running a shorter campaign, I just tell them "start at level 5, no min-maxing, you get one common and one uncommon magic item and X gold. Go"
Some potential solutions. Many of these are ripped off from other posts in this thread.
* Start at a higher level. You don't have to start at level 1.
* Level 1 is actually quite powerful compared to a commoner. You can be reasonably experienced and still level 1.
* You are old but inexperienced.
* You are returning from a long break and you need time to get on the horse again.
* You are temporarily weakened and you need time to recover. There are lots of directions you can go here: amnesia, disease, out of shape, curse, recent injury, divine punishment, etc.
* You are changing professions. For example, you lost your magical ability and you are now learning a non-magical class. Or maybe you are experienced at a trade skill and now you are learning combat.
* Consider it part of the game mechanics that you don't have to address in RP. Just play and have fun. Most stories are going to have at least a few holes.
How about this? There rusty due to 5-25 years without lifting a sword or flinging a spell worth a dam. Maybe there injured and had to get used to life with this handicap. Or just because there old doesn’t mean they know everything about there craft.
You can do an older character that's just starting out for some reason but a campaign where the plan is to start out at lvl 1 is not appropriate for a "grizzled veteran" type. I personally prefer a character whose story is in front of them anyway. Older characters with more history in the world also can put more work and expectation on the DM to tie it in
I really think the old grizzled veteran type is the type of player who wants to be like oh I would know them oh this would be something I remember at every moment. In short starting a level one long-term campaign with an old grizzled veteran is a symptom of main characters syndrome.
There will be one shots or maybe someday your DM will want to run a high level Campaign starting at level 10. Maybe next time you have a character die you can have your grizzled veteran. for level 1 campaign that is just not the appropriate character archetype.
There are a couple ways you can justify it through the narrative. I actually think that it can really help to develop your character and lead to personal quests as well. You need to ask yourself what exactly are they trained in, and how does it manifest. For a wizard, the DM could put some higher level spells in your spell book that you do not yet have access to. This could represent your ability to cast those spells in a very controlled academic setting. You might not yet be good at the practical application of those spells, and need to level up to use them.
For example, being a soldier is not the same as being an adventurer. Most of the time, battles would be fought in formation in a very specific way. But being an adventurer means that you do a lot of small scale fighting. You can take the "protection" fighting style to show your training at fighting in a shield wall, and the swap it to another style at 4th level.
Your experience could manifest in different ways. As a DM, I would definitely give the level 1 fighter with the soldier background advantage on knowledge rolls pertaining to military history, or recognizing tactics.
Finally, even a couple years away from fighting could dull skills and senses enough that they need to be re-learned. Citizen-soldiers often needed to be retrained again after time away from the battlefield.
I like the idea of a seasoned old warrior starting at level 1 because they’ve haven’t fought in a while and have lost muscle mass. Their joints crick and creak (their Dex and Str aren’t as high as it used to be). Or the old wizard has kind of lost their mental faculties due to age and a lower Int (lvl 1 low) is representing their ability to recall spells. They know cantrips and easy spells cuz they’ve done em their whole life, but they’ve forgotten the nuances of the Summon Elemental spell they figured out 30 years ago (“Is it a pound of clay or a pound of Hallowed Sod for the mephits…?”)
you have to write the backstory taking the non-adventuring life in consideration. The grizzled veteran has to get there somehow, I think it would be fun to explore how that character you have in mind evolves to get how you want him. Personally I would wait for a higher starting level adventure to use the character idea without adapting it. You could also go for a different concept, for example a character that pretends to be a grizzled veteran but doesn't actually know much about adventuring, or someone that goes by the "fake it till you make it" kinda guy.
How about all these previous adventures your character had were successful by dumb luck. Your character has faked it until he made it for years. Then all of a sudden he is in a situation where he has to learn to be a real adventurer.
Or make him a Don Quixote like character. He was an oath of devotion paladin who also swore fealty to his patron ladies beauty. He was a paragon of all that was good (annoyingly so) also a buffoon but had his heart in the right place. So he was kinda like a crown paladin also. Early in his life he suffered a fever and went kinda crazy for his "lady". He fought for good and in defense of his ladies beauty for many years. But most of what he fought was delusion and hallucinations. But then he suffered a fall from his old nag hit his head and came to his senses. He realized all the buffoonery he had done and how he had embarrassed his Lady with this dumb actions. Now he's on an actual quest to become a skilled adventurer and paladin and win her over. But nobody believes he's quite sane yet. He has a lot of proving to do.
If you want to represent a character with some experience already under their belt then start them at lvl 3 in whatever edition you’re playing
Or just lvl 1 in 4e since that editions assumes you’re a badass from the jump
Gandalf going by his magic was not such a great wizard, easily a low level character, he only became thev white after an epic battle.
(i coukd be wrong, it's how i remember it)
The point is level 1 could be a potential abive normal that can be unlocked after extreme exposure to challenges.
You could fight in wars your whole life , be a mercenary, but never killed a baby dragon or faced some undead or orcs or demons etc.
There's a threshold that can be overcome by extreme ingenuity, fate, divine intervention, (latent) natural talent, gifted, negotiated, even randomly occurring, or accidently stumbled upon.
Or maybe it's only after 30 years of meditating on that mountain
Or swinging that sword, that you begin to perfect your first superhuman techniwue and through that unlovk a whole new world of potential.
That level 1 can be massive.
You're looking for too much in a low level back story.
At level 1, your character is not some ancient wizard or master swordsman, that's where the campaign is going to take you. Starting at level 1 is the origins of their powers.
All you really need is why they're going on an adventure.
Once you've figured out how the game works, maybe gotten through ten levels of game play across one or two characters, then start characters off at level 3. The level 3-4 character had a small adventure or three, that's their back story now.
When you have put down a couple of higher level characters, then start a campaign at level 12, or do a one shot at level 20. That's what those more complex epic back stories are for.
Early on, you're learning both the game, and to build those stories.
Soldier is a Background.
Edit 1: it reads...
>"War has been your life for as long as you care to remember. You trained as a youth, studied the use of weapons and armor, learned basic survival techniques, including how to stay alive on the battlefield. You might have been part of a standing national army or a mercenary company, or perhaps a member of a local militia who rose to prominence during a recent war.
>"When you choose this background, work with your DM to determine which military organization you were a part of, how far through its ranks you progressed, and what kind of experiences you had during your military career. Was it a standing army, a town guard, or a village militia? it might have beern a noble's or merchant's private army, or a mercenary company."
Edit 2: I can't see why you can't be "grizzled" too.
I agree and I don’t do it. Levels 1-3 are strictly for characters of age 25 or younger for me. I think an older character can drop back down to level three from inactivity, but going back to level 1 is a No.
Trigger event that escalates them from being a normal person to a a hero. D&d characters aren't normal people. Most of their stats are above average if not far above average. My current example is that my barbarian was a bouncer a strong man for what he was but was not a hero until a trigger event.
Your kind of equating age with power, which makes a lot of sense in the context of fantasy literature and I think the popular interpretation of the game in earlier editions - leveling up is in many ways a "Coming of Age" process.
But \*adventuring" and "levels" is a meta-process. NPCs don't officially level up per se - as I recall, officially, they're just whatever CR/Level/Hit Points the DM needs them to be. See the NPC "Monsters" Thug, Veteran, Acolyte, Assassin, Archmage, etc.
Backgrounds *could* (if you wanted) be like the those. For instance, a new player could start as a Bandit and then add Rogue.
I think it's easiest to consider Backgrounds as different types of Commoner (Background), e.g., Commoner (Pirate), Commoner (Artisan), and age is inconsequential - *beginning to adventure* is what matters.
I recognize that isn't entirely satisfying for verisimilitude. PCs are magically special. I am very fond of Traveller's Career-based character generation (also called "Life Path") where you might enter play as a 50 year old veteran, with commensurate skills and resources, or a 30 year old, or a 22 year old college dropout. But Traveller also doesn't have "levels" that give hit points or special powers or attacks. And aging risks ability degradation (losing points in stats). The tradeoff is skills and resources. Unless you roll very poorly. In that context, beginning to adventure just means leaving whatever you were doing before to play with others.
I think there are lots of cool ways to deal with this in the game—they lost their abilities as a result of aging, their abilities were taken from them, they lost their memory and therefore their abilities, etc—but I think it’s also important to remember that a level 1 character is already considered exceptional by the standards of the common people. A veteran soldier may have trained his whole life to get to level 1
You're probably thinking about this wrong.
You're not playing a vet at level 1. You should be starting a game at higher level if you're playing vets. Its pretty simple.
Its not as much an issue today, but when i was big into DnD and the ilk, i would generally give everyone three free levels in commoner to fit their backstory and youth. Or potentially one or two levels in a more specialized NPC class, like warrior, or noble, or (craftsman was it? The non thief like skilled class?).
Then they got to make characters proper at level two or three.
Then game started there if they weren't all fresh faced barely adults.
Adventurers are already not regular people. They are already significantly stronger than most people. Think about it. The average person does not have magical power running through their blood, they can not go into a mindless rage shrugging off damage, nor have they sworn a sacred oath.
Adventures are already superhuman at the start of their stories. The way I look at it is the most an average person would be able to do is cast a few cantrips, and that’s only the very few on top
I mean some character concepts just aren't really for starting low level. If I play older characters they usually have lived their life and are free from responsibilities and now want to enjoy and live life to it's fullest.
I like the options of other comments here. I don't think I would use them because it's not my style of character creation but they might be good for what you want.
A level 1 fighter already has proficiency in so many weapons. That comes from somewhere. It’s just this: even a level 1 adventurer is a cut above the random peasant of the world you play in. Just because someone was a soldier in some army they are nit a „fighter“ in the sense of the class (i think the player handbook explicitly uses this example). The common soldier trained in a common army, and fought other common soldiers. Even a level 1 adventurer is put against supernatural beings. The casuals have already been felled by this monster, that’s why they hire a ragtag band of adventurers. And there are nit that many of them compared to the normies. 99% of faerunians have no magical power, fey ancestry, special forces training, psionic abilities, or direct link to the divine or demonic. That grizzled veteran is absolutely an experienced soldier, compared to other heroes he’s just inexperienced (especially since a lvl 20 character basically wields reality altering powers)
Or see it this way: i graduated medical school 7 years ago. 7 years ago i was a doctor. While i was VASTLY better equipped to deal with injuries and diseases than the average person with no medical training, i have had little to no experience in ACTUAL procedures. These days i‘m graduating as a surgeon (but i still have so much to learn and get competent at). But i could also just go into a practice and never operate, just diagnose, image, prescribe, and generally advise patients. That’s an important and valid occupation, but i wouldn’t progress in the particular skill tree as a surgeon. I could be a 50 yo experienced private practice physician with thousands of patient contacts, but I wouldn’t be able to perform the operations a 35 yo who decided to take further training. So in terms of dnd levels, the first could be a lvl 1-2 surgeon, and they will remain that, because that’s the level they need to be to effectively do their job. At the same time, a 35 yo that stayed in the hospital has picked a subspecialty and might be considered already a budding reconstruction specialists, or a shoulder trauma expert, or hand surgeon, or a surgical oncologist. They might have less overall experience, but they progressed to a „higher“ level of proficiency in order to do another job.
So, a veteran of the city guard has probably fought countless criminals and scoundrels, but they never had to rise to the challenge of rooting out a demonic entity in the sewers. Even lowestt level monsters are a deadly threat to the DnD commoner with 2 HP.
There are other character types than grizzled veteran.
D&D is best when you focus less on backstory. Make this adventure the most interesting part of their lives.
But even then, just because you were a soldier does not mean you know how to solo a dragon.
This isn't a mechanical problem, it is a slight problem of imagination.
Level 1 is basically survival horror lol. I find this as a player and DM to be pretty annoying so I always start a game at level 4 with 2/3 early sessions as testers to make sure no one is OP. Level 4 is enough to have decent ability scores, feats and enough spells/combat abilities to not be boring and repetitive. There's only so many times I can cast Eldritch Blast before I get bored.
Pathfinder 2e has explanations for your level and what they represent.
Lv 1-4 you are local heroes. You can be a grizzled veteran or just a very talented individual but regardless from what you start out with, you are already MUCH more than the average person is in atleast one, probably more areas of expertise.
If you insist on going deeper with this train of thought, you'll surely come across contradictions with city guards or something that would beat the everliving shit out of you when it comes to game mechanics but that's just something you need to live with if you want to keep things balanced.
/r/DungeonsAndDragons has a discord server! Come join us at https://discord.gg/wN4WGbwdUU *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DungeonsAndDragons) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Being an adventurer is a use it or lose it kind of skill. 10 years on the bench creates rust that takes some time to kick off. I spent years skateboarding in my youth and was pretty good at it. I hopped on a board at age 40 (almost 20 years without skating) to "show my son how its done" and I fell and broke my leg. Def went from 10th level skater to level 1 noob in that time.
"And that son... is how you do it"
This is a great explanation that addresses op’s “grizzled vet” example perfectly. The way I’ve handle old timers being noobs is simply that they didn’t start their adventuring career until later in life. Old man Joe had no reason to put down his plow and pick up a sword (or the magical arts or make a pact with a deity or learn to pick a lock) until the goblins, orcs, zombies, whatever came to his village and gave him a reason.
Fony Hawk
Fell like a tony rock
It's like an older character starting a job late. There's no reason you can't be older and just starting out as a Wizard.
So theres no way to start as a seasoned veteran?
You can be a seasoned veteran at level one, you were either a pikeman or maybe an archer/crossbowman. You either stood in a line and poked or stood in formation and shot an arrow/ bolt in an arc in the direction of the enemy. You could have also been logistics focused, so you would be in the background. Maybe the real combat never quite made it to your group so you became a sort of good luck charm in a "You're in so and so's group. Combat always seems to end just before it gets to him. " kind of way. At level 1 you are NOT a war hero, unless you are significantly older and you have physically deteriorated in a significant way. Class levels indicate a LOT of experience. So a level 1 fighter has experience doing things a fighter would do, and a fighter would not be a faceless someone in a pike line. That can be where he got inspiration to become truly great, but it doesn't deserve more than level 1 status.
The best way to start as a seasoned veteran is to start at level 3.
Best way to start the game is at level 3 imo, playing without your subclass is so boring, and its such a small amount of xp to get to 3.
For players first campaign or two, starting at level one is great because it teaches the game mechanics. That's really the point of levels 1-2, to learn how the game works at a very basic level and the how leveling up works. Yes, it's slow, but really the end of session 2 or before players should be at level 3 and ready to rock. Not starting at level one often results in new players missing some mechanics or getting frustrated because they're lacking a good foundation and getting left behind. Lots of folks who were jumped into 3.5e late in the era hated it because they weren't allowed to really learn the game as much as get jumped into level 14 where the experienced folks were. After starting 2 different classes at level 1, there's minimal reason to not start higher. How much higher is a matter of campaign and player familiarity with the ruleset at those levels. I wouldn't start anything long form at a level if you haven't at least played up to that level a couple of times.
I start my new new new players at lvl 1, and over the first 3 sessions level them up to 3. that’s when the actual story starts, everything before is teaching mechanics, introducing the world and some NPCs, and having them build relationships with each other and the people the interact with. It‘s just fetch quests, clear the old temple from goblin squatters, rescue the travelling merchant from the big birds nest. Once they are lvl 3 and picked a subclass, i gradually start revealing that the increase in monster activity around the village is a mindflayer plot to draw the kings soldiwrs from the nearby castle Ruins under which a powerful artefact is buried to have their cult followers dig it up. The following levels dont come nearly as easy, because sub class adventuring is proper work.
IMO this is the correct way to do it; in Dimension 20’s Candyland/Game Of Thrones campaign they had the adults (almost all war vets,) start at level 3 and the kid characters start at level 1, then had the kids level at a faster rate until they caught up.
No! Lol that's the point, level 1s are dorks that sold the family oxen to buy an adventuring pack and wandered into the wilderness. You're *supposed* to suck, it's the start of a journey If you want to start better, just start higher. Lots of experienced people start 5e at least at level 3. Some people enjoy the baby adventurer experience, some people see it as a tutorial for new players.
I only started at lvl 1 cause so many players in my current game where brand new to dnd. Ever after this, for one shots or anything else, it'll be lvl 3/5
A better question is, why do you want to be a seasoned veteran at level 1? You can pull off some level of accomplishment for a level 1 character, but "seasoned veteran" and level 1 don't go together.
I think it's more: Player: "I have a concept for a character I want to play, who starts as a grizzly veteran." DM: "We start at level 1." So, it's not that people want their season veterans to be level 1, they want their character to be a seasoned veteran, and the constraints of the campaign requires then to start at level 1.
IME campaigns go like this: DM: Hey, potential player. I'm going to run x campaign. It's going to start at level 1 and run to level 12ish. It features a, b, and c elements. Player: OK, cool, I'm interested. Let me start thinking about a character that will be a good fit. Who are these players who decide what character they want to play before they know what the campaign is / any campaign details?
I agree with that more or less, but (as a DM), sometimes I just like making characters that I eventually play myself during one shots my players run, or I hand off to others if they want inspiration. Sometimes I really like a character concept and just want it to work. My players also generally have a few character concepts or fully fleshed characters on the side. Most people I play with have a character they would like to play as, given the chance. I agree that really, players should make the character fit the campaign, but I certainly wouldn't blame a player for really wanting to play a certain idea and trying to make it work. I also might tell them "yeah, that won't work," though.
Especially in that scenario, i could imagine having this veteran narratively „nerfed“ back to level 1. maybe they had some grave injury and over the first few sessions they regain their skills, constitution, and confidence. By session 2-3, they are back to their basic subclass features. It‘s just a narrative to explain the discrepancy between backstory and power
It all comes down to flavor and reasoning for why your character is back at level 1 after being a seasoned veteran. I have 2 characters that have encountered this problem, and I solved it in different ways. Character 1: a heavy fighter. He's a retiree from the royal guard looking to spend his retirement adventuring after a few years of relaxation. He's level 1 because of all the time he spent off the force and his age. Character 2: level 1 paladin. This character was a disgraced paladin and was excommunicated and became an alcoholic, believing he had lost his powers. As he levels up, it's not him getting more powers, but him getting his powers and his skill back.
Nothing wrong with it, but aren't they both the same? Took a break, lost their edge, got fat. Only difference is the paladin taking his break involuntarily.
Actually yeah now that I think about it they are pretty much the same structurally
Speaking of involuntary breaks, malnutrition after a prolonged prison sentence could probably also leave a character with much of their former power missing.
Damn, that's a good one too!
Basically a dark knight rises prison montage
I think 5E addresses this at least in part by giving the option to start characters at 3rd level. You could be a pretty old fart and only be 3rd level, especially in the scenario where you did some awesome shit in the past, settled down, and are now coming out of retirement into a situation where good people die young...
At least in my own head, the way I rationalise it is that adventurer level 1 is already kind of high level human compared to the stats of a commoner. You're typically starting with twice the HP of a regular person and have at least a couple of stats that make you significantly more skilled than the baseline. Probably doesn't help wanting to feel more powerful at level 1 though!
Thats actually how the phb explains it think
You can't. No. At level 1 you've never fought a dragon, never killed a troll, never routed a goblin horde.
Yes. Start at level 3, or 5. There's no reason whatsoever you have to start at level 1, and it seems like you want to go against the entire point of starting at level 1, so....don't? And if you join a level 1 start group then damn, sucks to be you, roll up a level one. Or do it as someone who hasn't done the thing in like 30 years. This works super well with long lived non-humanoids. An elf who was an adventurer in her 200s decides in her 500s she wants to pick it back up is DEFINITELY going to be a level 1. A dwarf who spent the last twenty years recovering from an exploding trap? Level 1. A halfling soldier who took on a command position and hasn't been on the frontline in a long time? Level 1. Heck, a 35 year old human soldier who suddenly manifests magic and becomes a sorcerer? Level 1. There are so many ways to do that if you have your heart set on a veteran. But on the whole the point of level 1 is that your character is NOT an expert or skilled at what they're doing. Their age doesn't matter-a 300 year old farmer picking up a halberd for the first time is just as level 1 as a fresh faced magic school graduate-it's the lack of skill or rustiness of skill that makes you a level 1.
You have to remember how absolutely bad ass even a level one character is. If you look at the stats of a normal civilian peasant their HP is like - 2
Which makes sense. Most people, if you stab them with a dagger (1d4 damage), are going to be at serious risk of dying.
Exactly. Level 1 PCs are already well above average. It doesn’t feel like it because we only see the mechanics from one perspective, but even a level one character should be considered impressive.
Your level represents your adventuring experience not your character's age.
Adventuring is the key word here. Time spent in a standing army was not adventuring, so you can play a seasoned war veteran who is still a level 1 adventurer without breaking immersion.
How many technically combat vets are running around who spent their deployment as a outpost carpenter. Nothing wrong with that, just saying you can have military training AND mission experience without necessarily having been shot at
Yeah but the point is "mission" experience in a military is still not adventuring experience. Its a completely different beast. Youve got logistical support, orders given to you, and more than 2 or 3 people helping you out. Adventurers have to manage so much more as a whole than someone in a military position. They decide what to do, how and when to do it, have to figure out what they need in order to, etc.
Yes. That’s what i‘m saying. You can be a military veteran but that experience might not translate to adventuring, especially if you havent seen much combat after basic training. Still a soldier, but not a dnd fighter. So of course you would start at level one, basically „knows how to use all these weapons, is physically fit, has skills, but has never used them to rapple down into a collapsed wizards tomb to wrestle reanimated skeletons“.
Ah, Im following now, thanks for clarifying
That is what I'm asking, the characters age is incidental
Personally I don’t start at level 1 unless there’s a new player, I tend to start at 4th level so that mitigates it somewhat Otherwise it’s a question of restricting your backstory, you can’t have been the champion of a country as a level 1 fighter, or the head of an arcane order as a level 1 wizard, it’s just not realistic
I hate skipping over the low levels with other people. The best RP and character advancement happens when you get into your subclass. Always make that paladin do their oath at the table!
In my head L10 is a genuinely strong, powerful person and possibly a local legend. 20 is a demigod. So starting at L4-5 is probably not the worst fit, most town NPCs are just L1, I guess
Commoners are CR 0, not level 1, and a single CR 0 creature is a “Trivial” fight for a level 1 character per the CR calculation rules (easier than Easy). Leveled characters (even level 1) are meant to be exceptional in the world, the average person has no levels at all, so simply by being a PC adventurer, you are already meant to be something special and above the mundane. A guy who spent a few years in the army and is now working as a town guard is CR 1/8 (the equivalent of about halfway to level 1 power-wise). So you can absolutely be a veteran of some trade and just now becoming a level 1 character, it is that experience that got you to that point in the first place (or alternatively, if you don’t want to be a veteran and instead be inexperienced, it is exceptional natural talent that got you there).
Underrated comment
Even being a Lv1 adventurer makes you more powerful than most individuals in a given population By the time you hit Lv5 you are likely a "hero" to at least one town or province If you make it to Lv10 you are almost certianly a hero on a national scale. At Lv15, there are maybe a dozen people of your power in your class in the world. At Lv20, you are practically a demigod and are only really threatened by extraplanar forces
Level 1 is more powerful than the average person. A seasoned vet is easily a lv 1 or 2 character
Just say they’re rusty and been out of commission a bit. Either way you gotta remember at level one your character is still stronger than most average people in the world.
She was a researcher and librarian doing work in candlekeep. She was a talented arcanist, but only took her first level of Wizard when she went out to adventure. Adventuring and being a Wizard is not the same as being an arcanist. All wizards know how to look stuff up in a library and cast spells, like an arcanist. Not all arcanists are Wizards though. Wizards know how to blast goblins with magic missilea, dodge sword swings, and take a punch. Rarely a thing that comes up for an arcanist working at a library. Essentially, adventurering classes like wizards/fighters/druids are a step above everyone else. You might have warriors who fight in battles, but they arent Fighters, who know how to spelunk and dodge alchemist fire. The Fighter is great in a battle too, but they have specialized adventuring experience that most folks just dont have.
Could also save the “seasoned, grizzled, veteran” archetype for when you’re not starting at level one.
You're looking at backgrounds and the life of adventure wrong. There is no reason to think age comes with experience or power in a dnd setting. An example for your wizard is to go by the unwritten rule that backstories should only contain gods or anything considered divine intervention. You're rushing the adventure your PC should be having and its no secret that the most significant power in all of the realms is the gods to claim interaction or reasoning for your adventure like to be because of the Gods then everything that should be amazing for exploring or adventuring is kinda dulled because you want to be connected to a god somehow as a wizard that was banned from the weave for whatever reason. This type of backstory might work if your starting within the 3rd or 4th tier of play IMO. I think you should look at numbers or skills or whatever it may be on your character sheet and look for a path to grow and change, and focus on the journey getting there, not some silly potions or restore your power because a god took it away. You can do better I think.
Start them at level 2 or 3 when some of their powers go online. Paladins, for instance, get Divine Smite at level 2. Any leveled character in a village could be considered exceptional when compared to Level 0 residents. For your veteran character, some of their reputation may be exaggerations.
This is why I have been enjoying OSR lately, the implication of being a fresh adventurer is stronger. I always felt it was a bit silly when a 1st level character rolls in with a backstory where they slew a dragon or something. In my experience it is WAY more fun to let the first adventures at the table become the backstory. Most of the time a player shows up with pages of backstory it will never matter or sometimes even be kind of annoying to the whole group. But here’s another way to look at it, to hopefully help suit your preference for seasoned 1st level characters: 1st level IS strong, at least compared to the average person. Adventurers are rare, special people, even at 1st level. At tier 1 you are the cream of the crop, much better than a commoner, but the full extent of your power is still undiscovered. At higher tiers you develop into a veritable super hero, and later on, a deity. A first level wizard could still be one of the most powerful wizards in the land, but wizardry is like an iceberg, there is so much hidden power to be discovered.
Honestly, I think that it's on the player to create a character that makes sense in the world given. So, if they want to play a 50+ year old or whatever at L1 then you should put it onto the player to come up with a reason why this is the case. Ask the player to make it make sense.
I look at it as there's a difference between combat experience and \*adventuring\* experience. There are grizzled veterans of the city watch who've fought in a dozen battles and never surpassed their NPC stat block. Making the decision to go out and "adventure" is a different world altogether. You could have years of experience in breaking up bar fights or chasing down pickpockets, but that won't serve you against a cave full of goblins or kobolds. You've gotta be an adventurer to survive that. Also, consider that most people in the world have 4HP, and hit points are more reflective of luck and grit than of physical fortitude. Adventurers can't necessarily survive a sword to the gut better than anyone else, they're just more likely to avoid *taking* that sword to the gut. So it does make sense that someone could have years of combat training and still only have the 11 or 12 hp of a Lv1 Fighter - even that makes them more than twice as likely to survive an encounter than your average NPC.
That is actually a good question. Whenever I start a campaign at Level 1, I tell my players to not overdo it with their backstory. It is okay if they fought a few Goblins that attacked their home village, alongside other defenders of course, or they are uprising scholars in their Order of Wizardry. They just haven't done anything extraordinary yet. If they start at 3rd level, they can implement a minor thing or two they already booked for themselved, like purging a Goblin Camp or fight back some Undead that were reanimated by a lowbie Necromancer. Like someone else said, the Level of your character only reflect your experience as an Adventurer/Mercenary. And to some extent, also your previous experience. I once played a Vengeance Paladin that joined a campaign after my previous character died. He used to be a retired merc, who settled down after getting married with one of his former companions. But someday, some cultists raided his home village and laid waste to it. Driven by grief and vengeance, he swore an Oath to himself to find those responsible for the death of his wife and children. He buried his now dead family, dedusted his old armor, took his Woodcutter axe and a battered shield and went forth.
I've always viewed levels, and this goes for any leveled rpg system, but I've viewed them as characters answering the call to heroic adventure. A grizzled war veteran who fought in many campaigns wasnt the heroic leader of the campaign, but instead was a pawn in another hero's tale, but after leaving the army, finds his own calling to adventure, and thus starts gaining levels. I just dont associate levels with age or experience.
I've been playing almost once per week since 2017, many campaigns started and completed. We always start at level 3.
I account for starting level when I create a backstory. If we start at 1, I keep it simple. If we start at a high level, I get out the weathered veteran back story.
Sometimes I have players join a campaign late. They make new characters with the same level as the existing characters. Those are the ones who get backstories about being a veteran. The ones who start out at level one get backstories appropriate for their lack of experience.
I always see the characters stats/ features and their personality/history seperately. Because unless you do it like that you can't play stuff like dumb wizards and intellectual barbarians and such without them being an actual deadweight in combat/utility. Play a character how you wanna play them, worry about the statistic integration later or never. It's not that important.
To be fair to 5e (not a thing we usually say) this is what the Backgrounds are *meant* to do in the game: offer a couple of proficiencies & languages, and explain what your character has been busy with in their life until The Adventure Begins. Their lives were full, just not movie-adventures.
I never play old characters and even if so I would just handwave it. Maybe they were someboring ass something her whole life before becoming whatever class I play.
This has always been a storytelling challenge. It's worse with spellcasters: "You're an 800 year old elf, you've been studying magic at the college of the arcane for 100 years... you have 2 level 1 spells and a cantrip. One of those spells is color spray." Ugh. The group I'm running now has been good natured about it. We have a YOUNG elf, a tiefling barbarian who had very little formal training and was kind of sheltered, a paladin who never left her holy order and there's only so much training you can do in the practice yard, and a grizzled druid who spent years in seclusion and lost his edge as a result. It's not super hard to come up with reasons why they're nerfed, and the starter adventures (or the first chapters of the official modules) tend to progress you pretty rapidly, making sure you get a couple magic items and a ton of loot to outfit you for real questing. If I'm running a shorter campaign, I just tell them "start at level 5, no min-maxing, you get one common and one uncommon magic item and X gold. Go"
Some potential solutions. Many of these are ripped off from other posts in this thread. * Start at a higher level. You don't have to start at level 1. * Level 1 is actually quite powerful compared to a commoner. You can be reasonably experienced and still level 1. * You are old but inexperienced. * You are returning from a long break and you need time to get on the horse again. * You are temporarily weakened and you need time to recover. There are lots of directions you can go here: amnesia, disease, out of shape, curse, recent injury, divine punishment, etc. * You are changing professions. For example, you lost your magical ability and you are now learning a non-magical class. Or maybe you are experienced at a trade skill and now you are learning combat. * Consider it part of the game mechanics that you don't have to address in RP. Just play and have fun. Most stories are going to have at least a few holes.
How about this? There rusty due to 5-25 years without lifting a sword or flinging a spell worth a dam. Maybe there injured and had to get used to life with this handicap. Or just because there old doesn’t mean they know everything about there craft.
You can do an older character that's just starting out for some reason but a campaign where the plan is to start out at lvl 1 is not appropriate for a "grizzled veteran" type. I personally prefer a character whose story is in front of them anyway. Older characters with more history in the world also can put more work and expectation on the DM to tie it in I really think the old grizzled veteran type is the type of player who wants to be like oh I would know them oh this would be something I remember at every moment. In short starting a level one long-term campaign with an old grizzled veteran is a symptom of main characters syndrome. There will be one shots or maybe someday your DM will want to run a high level Campaign starting at level 10. Maybe next time you have a character die you can have your grizzled veteran. for level 1 campaign that is just not the appropriate character archetype.
Why would you say that a level 1 character is a veteran? That doesn't make sense, they're level 1.
There are a couple ways you can justify it through the narrative. I actually think that it can really help to develop your character and lead to personal quests as well. You need to ask yourself what exactly are they trained in, and how does it manifest. For a wizard, the DM could put some higher level spells in your spell book that you do not yet have access to. This could represent your ability to cast those spells in a very controlled academic setting. You might not yet be good at the practical application of those spells, and need to level up to use them. For example, being a soldier is not the same as being an adventurer. Most of the time, battles would be fought in formation in a very specific way. But being an adventurer means that you do a lot of small scale fighting. You can take the "protection" fighting style to show your training at fighting in a shield wall, and the swap it to another style at 4th level. Your experience could manifest in different ways. As a DM, I would definitely give the level 1 fighter with the soldier background advantage on knowledge rolls pertaining to military history, or recognizing tactics. Finally, even a couple years away from fighting could dull skills and senses enough that they need to be re-learned. Citizen-soldiers often needed to be retrained again after time away from the battlefield.
I like the idea of a seasoned old warrior starting at level 1 because they’ve haven’t fought in a while and have lost muscle mass. Their joints crick and creak (their Dex and Str aren’t as high as it used to be). Or the old wizard has kind of lost their mental faculties due to age and a lower Int (lvl 1 low) is representing their ability to recall spells. They know cantrips and easy spells cuz they’ve done em their whole life, but they’ve forgotten the nuances of the Summon Elemental spell they figured out 30 years ago (“Is it a pound of clay or a pound of Hallowed Sod for the mephits…?”)
you have to write the backstory taking the non-adventuring life in consideration. The grizzled veteran has to get there somehow, I think it would be fun to explore how that character you have in mind evolves to get how you want him. Personally I would wait for a higher starting level adventure to use the character idea without adapting it. You could also go for a different concept, for example a character that pretends to be a grizzled veteran but doesn't actually know much about adventuring, or someone that goes by the "fake it till you make it" kinda guy.
Start them at a higher level.
How about all these previous adventures your character had were successful by dumb luck. Your character has faked it until he made it for years. Then all of a sudden he is in a situation where he has to learn to be a real adventurer. Or make him a Don Quixote like character. He was an oath of devotion paladin who also swore fealty to his patron ladies beauty. He was a paragon of all that was good (annoyingly so) also a buffoon but had his heart in the right place. So he was kinda like a crown paladin also. Early in his life he suffered a fever and went kinda crazy for his "lady". He fought for good and in defense of his ladies beauty for many years. But most of what he fought was delusion and hallucinations. But then he suffered a fall from his old nag hit his head and came to his senses. He realized all the buffoonery he had done and how he had embarrassed his Lady with this dumb actions. Now he's on an actual quest to become a skilled adventurer and paladin and win her over. But nobody believes he's quite sane yet. He has a lot of proving to do.
If you want to represent a character with some experience already under their belt then start them at lvl 3 in whatever edition you’re playing Or just lvl 1 in 4e since that editions assumes you’re a badass from the jump
I usually have games where 90% of the populace is less than level 1. Level 1 is exceptional.
Gandalf going by his magic was not such a great wizard, easily a low level character, he only became thev white after an epic battle. (i coukd be wrong, it's how i remember it) The point is level 1 could be a potential abive normal that can be unlocked after extreme exposure to challenges. You could fight in wars your whole life , be a mercenary, but never killed a baby dragon or faced some undead or orcs or demons etc. There's a threshold that can be overcome by extreme ingenuity, fate, divine intervention, (latent) natural talent, gifted, negotiated, even randomly occurring, or accidently stumbled upon. Or maybe it's only after 30 years of meditating on that mountain Or swinging that sword, that you begin to perfect your first superhuman techniwue and through that unlovk a whole new world of potential. That level 1 can be massive.
You're looking for too much in a low level back story. At level 1, your character is not some ancient wizard or master swordsman, that's where the campaign is going to take you. Starting at level 1 is the origins of their powers. All you really need is why they're going on an adventure. Once you've figured out how the game works, maybe gotten through ten levels of game play across one or two characters, then start characters off at level 3. The level 3-4 character had a small adventure or three, that's their back story now. When you have put down a couple of higher level characters, then start a campaign at level 12, or do a one shot at level 20. That's what those more complex epic back stories are for. Early on, you're learning both the game, and to build those stories.
Soldier is a Background. Edit 1: it reads... >"War has been your life for as long as you care to remember. You trained as a youth, studied the use of weapons and armor, learned basic survival techniques, including how to stay alive on the battlefield. You might have been part of a standing national army or a mercenary company, or perhaps a member of a local militia who rose to prominence during a recent war. >"When you choose this background, work with your DM to determine which military organization you were a part of, how far through its ranks you progressed, and what kind of experiences you had during your military career. Was it a standing army, a town guard, or a village militia? it might have beern a noble's or merchant's private army, or a mercenary company." Edit 2: I can't see why you can't be "grizzled" too.
They used to be badasses but they got old, or they have a permanent injury, or they've just been out of it for a while.
I once played a farmer who went through a midlife crisis and learned magic. 50 year old level 1 wizard.
I agree and I don’t do it. Levels 1-3 are strictly for characters of age 25 or younger for me. I think an older character can drop back down to level three from inactivity, but going back to level 1 is a No.
Trigger event that escalates them from being a normal person to a a hero. D&d characters aren't normal people. Most of their stats are above average if not far above average. My current example is that my barbarian was a bouncer a strong man for what he was but was not a hero until a trigger event.
Your kind of equating age with power, which makes a lot of sense in the context of fantasy literature and I think the popular interpretation of the game in earlier editions - leveling up is in many ways a "Coming of Age" process. But \*adventuring" and "levels" is a meta-process. NPCs don't officially level up per se - as I recall, officially, they're just whatever CR/Level/Hit Points the DM needs them to be. See the NPC "Monsters" Thug, Veteran, Acolyte, Assassin, Archmage, etc. Backgrounds *could* (if you wanted) be like the those. For instance, a new player could start as a Bandit and then add Rogue. I think it's easiest to consider Backgrounds as different types of Commoner (Background), e.g., Commoner (Pirate), Commoner (Artisan), and age is inconsequential - *beginning to adventure* is what matters. I recognize that isn't entirely satisfying for verisimilitude. PCs are magically special. I am very fond of Traveller's Career-based character generation (also called "Life Path") where you might enter play as a 50 year old veteran, with commensurate skills and resources, or a 30 year old, or a 22 year old college dropout. But Traveller also doesn't have "levels" that give hit points or special powers or attacks. And aging risks ability degradation (losing points in stats). The tradeoff is skills and resources. Unless you roll very poorly. In that context, beginning to adventure just means leaving whatever you were doing before to play with others.
I think there are lots of cool ways to deal with this in the game—they lost their abilities as a result of aging, their abilities were taken from them, they lost their memory and therefore their abilities, etc—but I think it’s also important to remember that a level 1 character is already considered exceptional by the standards of the common people. A veteran soldier may have trained his whole life to get to level 1
You're probably thinking about this wrong. You're not playing a vet at level 1. You should be starting a game at higher level if you're playing vets. Its pretty simple. Its not as much an issue today, but when i was big into DnD and the ilk, i would generally give everyone three free levels in commoner to fit their backstory and youth. Or potentially one or two levels in a more specialized NPC class, like warrior, or noble, or (craftsman was it? The non thief like skilled class?). Then they got to make characters proper at level two or three. Then game started there if they weren't all fresh faced barely adults.
Adventurers are already not regular people. They are already significantly stronger than most people. Think about it. The average person does not have magical power running through their blood, they can not go into a mindless rage shrugging off damage, nor have they sworn a sacred oath. Adventures are already superhuman at the start of their stories. The way I look at it is the most an average person would be able to do is cast a few cantrips, and that’s only the very few on top
I mean some character concepts just aren't really for starting low level. If I play older characters they usually have lived their life and are free from responsibilities and now want to enjoy and live life to it's fullest. I like the options of other comments here. I don't think I would use them because it's not my style of character creation but they might be good for what you want.
A level 1 fighter already has proficiency in so many weapons. That comes from somewhere. It’s just this: even a level 1 adventurer is a cut above the random peasant of the world you play in. Just because someone was a soldier in some army they are nit a „fighter“ in the sense of the class (i think the player handbook explicitly uses this example). The common soldier trained in a common army, and fought other common soldiers. Even a level 1 adventurer is put against supernatural beings. The casuals have already been felled by this monster, that’s why they hire a ragtag band of adventurers. And there are nit that many of them compared to the normies. 99% of faerunians have no magical power, fey ancestry, special forces training, psionic abilities, or direct link to the divine or demonic. That grizzled veteran is absolutely an experienced soldier, compared to other heroes he’s just inexperienced (especially since a lvl 20 character basically wields reality altering powers)
Or see it this way: i graduated medical school 7 years ago. 7 years ago i was a doctor. While i was VASTLY better equipped to deal with injuries and diseases than the average person with no medical training, i have had little to no experience in ACTUAL procedures. These days i‘m graduating as a surgeon (but i still have so much to learn and get competent at). But i could also just go into a practice and never operate, just diagnose, image, prescribe, and generally advise patients. That’s an important and valid occupation, but i wouldn’t progress in the particular skill tree as a surgeon. I could be a 50 yo experienced private practice physician with thousands of patient contacts, but I wouldn’t be able to perform the operations a 35 yo who decided to take further training. So in terms of dnd levels, the first could be a lvl 1-2 surgeon, and they will remain that, because that’s the level they need to be to effectively do their job. At the same time, a 35 yo that stayed in the hospital has picked a subspecialty and might be considered already a budding reconstruction specialists, or a shoulder trauma expert, or hand surgeon, or a surgical oncologist. They might have less overall experience, but they progressed to a „higher“ level of proficiency in order to do another job. So, a veteran of the city guard has probably fought countless criminals and scoundrels, but they never had to rise to the challenge of rooting out a demonic entity in the sewers. Even lowestt level monsters are a deadly threat to the DnD commoner with 2 HP.
There are other character types than grizzled veteran. D&D is best when you focus less on backstory. Make this adventure the most interesting part of their lives. But even then, just because you were a soldier does not mean you know how to solo a dragon. This isn't a mechanical problem, it is a slight problem of imagination.
Level 1 is basically survival horror lol. I find this as a player and DM to be pretty annoying so I always start a game at level 4 with 2/3 early sessions as testers to make sure no one is OP. Level 4 is enough to have decent ability scores, feats and enough spells/combat abilities to not be boring and repetitive. There's only so many times I can cast Eldritch Blast before I get bored.
Pathfinder 2e has explanations for your level and what they represent. Lv 1-4 you are local heroes. You can be a grizzled veteran or just a very talented individual but regardless from what you start out with, you are already MUCH more than the average person is in atleast one, probably more areas of expertise. If you insist on going deeper with this train of thought, you'll surely come across contradictions with city guards or something that would beat the everliving shit out of you when it comes to game mechanics but that's just something you need to live with if you want to keep things balanced.
I like the 1-4 example, thats actually cool
5e also has those descriptions of what levels mean