Disparate character levels in a party

[stofsk]

I'm about to start an online game, and so far I've done two PC's prior histories. I have one level 9 Traveller, and one level 5 Merchant 3/Mercenary 2.

Discussing this with another player, I found that he's alarmed at the so far disparate nature of character levels. He was further alarmed when I told him I have two newbies who want to start at level 1. According to him, the party is hideously unbalanced.

Seriously, this has been a headache. I got into an argument with this guy today, yesterday I got into an argument with another player (but it was resolved). Plus, real life commitments as well as getting the 'flu haven't helped my sunny disposition.

Anyway, here's the situation: so far we have a party that ranges from level 1 to level 9. I already said that I will make all the rolls, I don't care about the numbers, I only care about what you do and how you do it. He doesn't seem to get where I'm coming from, so perhaps I'll give it up to you people who have had more experience with T20 than I have.

I know there is nothing in the handbook that I've read which says all characters absolutely MUST be of the same level, so what do I do? Have I unbalanced the party? Is this a problem, or can it be handled?

 

[far-trader]

I haven't actually run a T20 campaign, just a couple short bits, and lots of D&D so take this with those caveats.

I've heard for years all kinds of troubles arise when you have parties of disparate levels in D&D. It was not a problem anytime our group had it, and it happened pretty regular what with a party death and new recruits having to start at first level. In D&D they do their bit and mostly hang back. The more experienced characters teach by example and do most of the hard work and in no time the xps close the gap.

As to how this applies to T20 there should be even less of a problem since the goal is to avoid deadly conflict because a bullet doesn't much care if you are 9th level or 1st level, it'll kill you just about as easily.

I can bet the guy with the problem has a high level combat character and he thinks the rest of the party is just going to slow him down or get him killed. He's likely wrong on both counts but just as likely to end up dead in his first firefight.

Have you unbalanced the party? Not in my opinion, though some of your players may already be unbalanced

Is it a problem? That depends, largely on you as the referee, and some on the players.

How to handle it will depend on the type of game you all find fun. Find that and the rest is easy.

The two players wanting to start as level 1 will be the challenge. Finding things for thier characters to competantly do while they gain experience might not be easy. You'll have to insure that the game has solid roles for them to play.

The high level players should take on the roles of mentors and teach by leading. They will be easier to set up challenges for as they'll be busy overseeing the novices work as well as their own. But you'll want to have some action where they can excell with their experience, which will also help the novices rise that much faster.

Overall I don't think you'll have a problem for long if at all. The low levels will soon catch up to the high levels and they'll be more tailored to the game as it goes on while the high levels will be slower to get new skills and bonuses.

If you get stressed by it just come back here and you'll find friendly (if not helpful) gamers willing to spout their own opinions. That's all this is, my opinions. Hope it helps and if it does or not that you have good games and many of them

 

[stofsk]

Originally posted by far-trader:
As to how this applies to T20 there should be even less of a problem since the goal is to avoid deadly conflict because a bullet doesn't much care if you are 9th level or 1st level, it'll kill you just about as easily.

Exactly. This isn't D&D where the 9th level fighter has 9d10+Con HP over the level 1 mage with his 1d4 HP.

I love - LOVE - Lifeblood. Stroke of brilliance.

I can bet the guy with the problem has a high level combat character and he thinks the rest of the party is just going to slow him down or get him killed. He's likely wrong on both counts but just as likely to end up dead in his first firefight.

Funnily enough, he was going to play a Merc/Law Enforcer type character. He was thinking something along the lines of a SWAT officer.

Is it a problem? That depends, largely on you as the referee, and some on the players.

How to handle it will depend on the type of game you all find fun. Find that and the rest is easy.

At this point, it seems to be your stock-standard Free Trader game. The level 5 guy just got out of prison - rolled a 1 on his survival roll, rolled a 6 on the mishap, thankfully I gave him a decoration (GM fiat; I know Merchants and Mercs don't get decorations, but as far as I'm concerned it doesn't matter) - so instead of getting crippled he spent the time in slam. Anyway, he's out, did some wheeling and dealing and got himself a ship. He's now up to his eyeballs in debt repayments... but he's happy, because the ship is his.

As for the level 9 guy, he's the astrogator. He's got nothing else going for him, except for some connections and good diplomacy and information gathering skills. Both players are used to free form so they don't actually care about the level disparity.

Also, I'm the one making all the rolls. He - the guy who was crying about the level disparity - doesn't seem to understand that I don't care what the numbers say, if you want to do something give a plan of attack or a plan for implementation. I even pointed out to him that the level 9 guy has a lower attack rating and stamina/lifeblood pool than the level 5 guy.

The two players wanting to start as level 1 will be the challenge. Finding things for thier characters to competantly do while they gain experience might not be easy. You'll have to insure that the game has solid roles for them to play.

One of them wants to play a psionic. If another player goes with a higher level psionic, he can act as a mentor for her.

The other level 1er hasn't really thought about what his character is good at.

I like the idea of the higher level characters setting an example and teaching the lower level characters. very good idea, that.

 

[veltyen]

G'day stofsk,

One of the problems I had in a multilevel campaign was the possibility for a high level character to buy a single level of merchant and immediately jump to being one of the best merchants in the Universe. Going from Skill Rank 0-12 in a single level does break some of the core areas that are determined from limited skill areas (Trader, Broker, Gunnery, T/Astro, Pilot for example). With sensible players (or a more vigilant GM) this can be mediated.

That said a level one character in a flak jacket with a decent rifle is absolutely terrifying to anyone unprepared for it. Equipment far overpowers skills in some areas.

You may also want to point out to the LEO that he needs his own personal autodoc or sentient medic if he intends to be shot at much at all. Healing is moderately realistic.

In some ways warm bodies are far more important then the skills contained in them. A "cargo handler" doesn't need any skills to work on a ship, just a willingness to move crates around. Laborious time consuming work. Ditto with maintenance engineer (See "Red Dwarf").

The first shoot out I ever ran in T20 nearly resulted in the death of a level 12 Zhodani Noble at the hands of a level 1 thug with a homemade zip gun. First roll critical...

From experience with the first campaign there were a couple of thoughts that I carried over to my current T20 campaign.

- Money isn't everything. The trading rules can easily be broken. If you are rolling all the rolls you may wish to think of discarding some of the "problem" results. In my current game there is no formal accounting of funds, purchase of new items is done on a negotiation with GM basis. This does work a lot better in most ways.

- I've never really liked the DnD experience system (this isn't precisely linked to T20 as such). At appropriate times I nominate that a level can be awarded, and the players decide who most deserves the level. This stops the XP spiral that can result from disparate levels. In a split level campaign there should be a preponderous swing towards the lower level characters.

- Stress experience over skill Ranks. Someone who served on a tramp trader for 8 years in prior history should be able to do much more then someone who has better Ranks but no experience.

 

[tjoneslo]

I can give you my experiences running T20. I ran a game as part of the playtest for the T20 book back when it was originally published. We had characters with a 10 level difference (level 7 to level 17). The players were all long time gamers. They had the same reaction as your player did. But because we were doing a playtest game they were willing to play a few sessions to see how it worked. It worked fine despite the differences in levels. The lower level characters had specializations while the higher level character filled in at everything.

To you player who is complaining: Tell him to just play the game for a few sessions (at least two). The way the characters look on paper and they way the game runs are very different. A lot of D&D players don't like that surprise (which is why they play D&D).

For you: I reiterate veltyen remarks about money above. In every Traveller like space merchants game I've ever played or run, the players have managed to accumulate a scary amount of money even without trying to "game" the system.

 

[RickA]

I'll echo what's been said above. In T20, with the lifeblood system, level doesn't matter nearly as much.

Yes, your combat specialists will be better at 13th level than another combat specialist at 7th level (BAB is better, more attacks per round, etc) but it's NOT like DnD.

In DnD the main reason you want a party of more or less equal levels is because of hitpoints. Also you want your cleric to have enough high level healing spells to take care of the high level fighters damage, the mage to have enough high level spells to actually contribute in a combat vs. high level foes, etc.

In T20, it's as much about the equipement you are carrying around as much as any skill levels.

My group ranges from 9th to 13th level. Not as wide a stretch as you have, but it works out with out much problem at all. Why? Because the foe that is a combat challenge to the 9th level character is just as much a challenge to the 13th level guy. Thanks to Lifeblood.

 

[BetterThanLife]

I run an online game, though granted my experience with running an online game is limited, I have also quite a few years experience as a GM, DM, Traveller Referee. I don't know the particulars of how you intend to run your online game, mine is run using GRIP, but it seems to me that the potential player is going to cause more problems than he is worth.

If he doesn't want to play the game the way you are setting it up, then you either need to change the game you want to play to suit your players or if it is only one troublemaker, drop the troublemaker. It really is that simple. (Or threaten to drop him and see if he will fall inline.) People that want to argue with the GM are usualy more trouble than they are worth. They tend to ruin the game for the other players.

The way experience works, in AD&D all the way up to current 3.5, is that you need less experience to go up levels at lower levels than at higher levels. In Traveller since anyone goes down to weapons fire rather easily, situations with disparity of character levels is less of a problem, and they will quickly even out.

For example a typical full adventure is worth, 4000XP x the average party level, an Amberzone or Signal GK is worth 2000XP x the average party level. So 9+5+1+1=16 16/4 is 4, 8,000 divided 4 ways is 2000 each. While your 9th level character is likely to still be 9th level, your First level characters are now 2nd level and a good way on to third. After a second Amberzone, They each get an additional 2250, your 5th level character probably just went up a level, your ninth level character is probably a bit closer to 10th but might not quite be there but your 1st level characters are now 3rd.

It won't take too long for the lower characters to get caught up.

However the 1st level characters are missing out on one of the real beauties of Traveller, the Prior history experience. This gives you help in more ways than just experience points and skill levels. It gives you a foundation on your character's background and personality. A Character that spent 5 terms as a Marine is likely to show up with a Marine Haircut, and keep it cut that way, have discipline and expect others to be disciplined, etc. Someone that spent 3 terms as a Scout is likely to have a more laid back attitude but a sense of purpose and duty. ETC. This is especially true if the players roll through the Prior History instead of the GM. As they roll they make decisions and tend to get inspired and develope a better feel for the character. In this way I have always found Traveller Characters to be less flat than other RPGs. Instead of Generic Fighter #1, vs generic Fighter Fighter #2, you now have ex Marine, vs. Ex Army, Or even two Marines that went different routes during their career. Thet game has a more alive feeling, at least to me.

If the newbies are concerned about age then they can be barbarians or belters, if they are concerned that they are newbies to gaming so don't want to play someone with lots of background and history, this is actually a mistake brought on by the concept in T20 of levels. Ignore levels, it isn't all that important in T20, point out to them that creating a character using Prior History gives them an easier time of visualizing the character and adjusting to the role. A Newbie will actually have an easier time playing a character with 4-5 terms experience that they rolled, than one that is handed to them. (A mistake I made when I started my online campaign, because I wanted to get into the campaign instead of providing enough time to let them roll up their characters.)

For future reference I will set up one on one computer time with characters that need to be rolled.

One other thing I have discovered. Players like to roll dice. It makes them feel they are accomplishing things. If you are playing by email there was a rather simple way to do this in the old days. Avalon Hill came up with a method of rolling dice based on the stock market for playing their games by postal mail. If you are interested I can go look for it.

 

[parmasson]

If he is trouble flush him.
If you can't play nice and share the toys then slag off.

 

[Chaos]

One thing that can get the 1st level characters more "recognition" - that is, take away the notion that they are useless - ist to give them skills that the two veterans have neglected.

To that end, the psionic is a good idea, as none of the others is EVER going to be able to do what the psionic does.

As for the other player, does either of the two veterans have, say, the T/Medical skill? No? Then a 1st level character with 4 ranks in T/Medical is definitely better than nothing... the same is true for other skills, of course.

 

[Whipsnade]

Either dump the troublemaker or dump the idea of levels.

I know 'lifeblood' supposedly tones down the effects of levels, but levels, XP, and all that stuff in Traveller? ...shudder...

Anyweay, tell him to either fall in line or find another game.


Have fun,
Bill

 

[stofsk]

He hasn't made any noise since our argument yesterday. It's been a whole day.

I already told him then that if it's too troubling a concept to have a group of widely disparate levels, he should leave. He thought I was overreacting.

 

[far-trader]

OVERREACTING! I'D GIVE HIM OVERREACTING!

From Zoolander (what, like you haven't seen it as a guilty pleasure )

Maury: Go back home? You're overreacting.

Derek: I want to do something meaningful with my life Maury.

Oh, over RE acting. I thought you said over ACTING

 

[stofsk]

I failed to watch 'Zoolander' the same way someone on a battlefield fails to get shot.

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by stofsk:
I already told him then that if it's too troubling a concept to have a group of widely disparate levels, he should leave. He thought I was overreacting.

Stofsk,

Overreacting? You're the GM, it's your game, and you're overreacting? This guy sounds like more and more trouble. Hopefully he settle down long enough to realize that levels don't mean that much in T20.

You may want to have another PC at hand for him too. I get the sneaking suspician he won't fully grasp the idea of lifeblood until his PC dies...


Have fun,
Bill

 

[far-trader]

Originally posted by stofsk:
I failed to watch 'Zoolander' the same way someone on a battlefield fails to get shot.

No, you should catch it sometime, it's not as bad as getting shot, much

I don't know, maybe I was in a just dumb enough mood the night it was on cable and there was nothing else to do but it got a couple laughs out of me

Anyway, late here and much too do in the morning so I'll log off and not post inane off topic Spam anymore, this session

 

[veltyen]

Tragic Gasoline Fight Accident.

Nuff said really.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
Either dump the troublemaker or dump the idea of levels.

I know 'lifeblood' supposedly tones down the effects of levels, but levels, XP, and all that stuff in Traveller? ...shudder...

Anyweay, tell him to either fall in line or find another game.


Have fun,
Bill

Bill,
You keep making comments like that. Have you actually played T20? Do you currently have a CT campaign going? Did you feel the same way when MT came out and changed the setting and introduced the Task System? Did you feel the same way when TNE came out and flushed the setting and seriously changed the way ships worked? If you dislike T20 so much, and because you have played it, not because you dislike the concept, then stay out of the T20 sections ofthe board.

The comments are less than helpful and you appear to be putting something down for which you have no real concept of how it works. If you give it a real try, and still dislike it, then fine you are entitled to your opinion but you don't need to be bashing it here in a T20 forum.

In many ways T20 blows CT away. Yet it still manages to play like CT with a CT feel. Try it, you might be pleasantly surprised. (I know I was.)

To the others reading this, I appologize for getting up on my soapbox, and taking up your bandwidth. I will get down now.

 

[Despasian]

Anyway, here's the situation: so far we have a party that ranges from level 1 to level 9. I already said that I will make all the rolls, I don't care about the numbers, I only care about what you do and how you do it. He doesn't seem to get where I'm coming from, so perhaps I'll give it up to you people who have had more experience with T20 than I have.

Being able to run a party with varied levels will be dependent on you and the players, more than anything.
As with any campaign, the maturity and gamesmanship of the people involved are 90% of the issue. It seems you're already hitting turbulence, so you might want to reconsider the concept. While T20 does reduce the inherent challenges of "unbalanced levels" (that would be a BIG problem in other systems), there will still be issues that come up. If your players will have problems with any of that, I would consider starting over.

Is there a particular DESIRE to have disparate levels? Or did it just come out that way?
IMTU, I dislike having too wide a range in levels. Since the prior history generation makes it very possible, I made a house rule for generating characters.
We set an XP range that falls close to the level we wish PCs to start the campaign with.
The players will continue prior history to a minimum XP number.
Once a PC hits the set maximum XP, they cannot start another term.
This keeps all the PCs within a character level (+/- 1), whether it took a player 2 terms or 6 to reach the limits.
So far, it's been successful.

Wherever you end up, a game concept must be understood and accepted by everyone.
In other words:
If a player wants to be a part of the game (after the terms have been laid out), then no whining once the game starts. If they can't....then they shouldn't pull up a chair.

 

[stofsk]

It seems you're already hitting turbulence, so you might want to reconsider the concept.

Actually it was just one player, and he seems to be ok with it now.

Is there a particular DESIRE to have disparate levels? Or did it just come out that way?

I never thought about it. It just came out that way because one character essentially said "my character is 36 years old and is experienced." That translated into 4 terms of service, plus university. He ended up with 9 levels.

Meanwhile other players that are interested (I've only done three characters so far) want to play at level 1 becaust they WANT to be the newbie/green recruit. And since this is a ROLE-playing game, I say ⌧ it. Come up with a character concept and dazzle me.

 

[RandyT0001]

Stofsk, you didn't mention if your game is set in the OTU or not. If it's not then the psionicist may or may not be a problem. If it is set in the OTU then I think your biggest headache will be with the psionic. In the OTU psionicsists are viewed as Zhodani spies by the average joe on the street and are hated. If the average joe finds out about the psionicist then he will inform the Imperial authorities about it. The Imperials will probably start to hunt him down. This all came about during the Psionic Suppressions a few centuries before (assuming you are in year 900-1100). Even the other PC's will have this hatred. Have you determined a means to deal with this amongst the PC party? (If you want it in AD&D terms it's like having an evil PC in the mists of good party, lots of interparty friction.)

Of course if the game is not set in the OTU or is a modified OTU then it might not be a problem.

IMO. (Maybe I'm a bit more extreme then most Traveller refs and players when it comes to the use of psionics in the game.)