"Level 0" characters

Nils_Lindeberg · 12-30-2019, 06:33 PM

In older versions of D&D we often used the rules for NPC classes. You basically started as an Adept, instead of a Wizard. Then at a certain amount of XP you turned into your real class and started to level up normally. The reason for this was that the description of a Fighter was Veteran. And you already were better than ordinary soldiers. Instead of the more intuitive Zero to Hero, the campaigns were from Pro to Epic Hero.

In TFT we have different starting attribute points, 32 being the standard one.

But we are going for a a more low and gritty fantasy where a normal civilian farmer don't have IQ9 and 9 points of talents. He is not at his maximum. He could go to school, get into the army, or take up an apprenticeship and have plenty of room to learn new stuff.

So if a farmhand has ST11, DX10 and IQ9 and maybe only the Farmhand(1) talent. Sure he might be the farmhand that have taking his mitilia training seriously, or he can be that guy that run back and forth to his family on the other side of the forrest, or the charming guy with Sex Appeal or known for his great hearing or party skill. But more often than not he doesn't have more than one such skill. Leaving a lot of talent points unused.

Simulating a future possible hero that just got his call to adventure or is playing through session 0 or -1, he would be about the same. Maybe have a slightly higher potential so a 32 point character. But for the rest these would be my house rules for a "Level 0"-Hero.

You start out with 32 points of attributes.

You can only fill half of your IQ with talents and spells, round up.

You get 1 point of mundane talents for free per 15 years of starting age. Some real talents can be bought this way, eg. Boating for a fisherman, a third weapon talent for a soldier, etc. But no main heroic archetype talents. This is so you can widen your character not focus it harder on one thing.

You get one advantage that should be balanced with one disadvantage.

You get one smaller cultural bonus that everyone from your subculture gets.

It cost only 100XP to get a talent or a spell, if you are below your IQ number of talents. If you raise your IQ, you do not get back any extra talents or spells bought at 500XP, but you might get room for another at 100XP again. This rule will mostly solve the XP advantage of starting with a high IQ.

You get 3 Study talents or spells, at maximum your IQ+3.
Study talents and spells work on a case by case basis but should get about half effect or an activation roll at 4 vs the attribute or one die worse than the real talent if you have to roll for it.

One example could be a spell that you have to cast at 4 dice instead of 3, with an extra penalty on DX if it is above your IQ like a scroll. Apprentice Physicker that heal 1p with a healers kit. A half learned language that gives you basic understanding, but no more and you have to test IQ when something is complex. Sex Appeal, but with an extra die. Charisma that only works if you succeed with a test first. Tactics that work 50% of the time. Etc.

I intend to give out at least 100Xp per session at the start, or even more if there are longer downtime where they can earn XP through work and other things.

And no, the party will not be sent down into a Death Test type of a labyrinth at the start. It will be a sandbox that starts out really low key. Taking down one angry bear together with half of the village. Look into a mystery with maybe one fight at the end where they have the advantage against one competent person. And so on.

Equipment will be equally poor or lacking. In short a call to adventure start where they are mostly civilians, then reluctant heroes to be and finally heroes that accept that they have to go above and beyond what normal people are expected to do.

And normal people are mostly just as bad at things. A person that filled out all their talents and has IQ 11 is a professional, even though they might only be a 31 point character.

Any thoughts? Is it too harsh? We will be playing bi-weekly and I have had campaigns that last for years, so I want room for improvement over time.

FireHorse · 12-30-2019, 06:45 PM

IF you want to start at Level 0 (so to speak), then this is a good way to do it.

I would not want to start from Level 0, though. Fantasy Trip characters seem awfully prone to death even by the normal rules, so starting off even weaker seems a bit masochistic.

I would prefer to take the Level 0 phase of development as part of the backstory.

Nils_Lindeberg · 12-30-2019, 07:46 PM

My guess is that they will get a couple of 100 XP after Session 0 and 1, together with 3 Study things and they will be pretty much up to par, power-wise and equipment-wise. But it will never be a dungeon bashing campaign, so they might never even get into a fight for their lives.

Skarg · 12-30-2019, 11:03 PM

I think most of what you wrote sounds fine and in general I think starting out before you get your stronger abilities tends to be able to make people more connected to their characters (or at least, whatever characters survive...).

One of our better campaigns (GURPS, but could've been TFT) started out with typical 15-year-old peasant kids, and ran for about five years.

I would tend to not charge even 100 XP to learn most talents up to IQ level total points. I'd tend to have it require time and/or circumstances instead. I'd also tend not to give out 100 XP per session, unless they _are_ quite impressive / dangerous sessions, or sessions that cover a lot of game time. People can learn things without adventuring experience, and using the same XP used to raise attributes presents a dilemma, with attributes being quite tempting.

If you are handing out 100 XP per session, many fighter types could be quite happy only spending 1/2 IQ on their (weapon) talents, and putting that straight into raised attributes. In fact it seems like a natural choice, and I think not what you intend. Hence my suggestion to award less XP but not require XP to learn talents.

Nils_Lindeberg · 12-31-2019, 12:02 PM

Excellent point Skarg.

I have an XP system for jobs and general downtime, but it might be a tad too generous with a campaign that involves a lot of downtime. I tailored it around the 100 XP mark for filling up your IQ with talents. But you are right, many archetypes that are not talent-focused will jump fairly quickly to 36 point characters and that in turn will raise the difficulty level for fights for everyone.

The idea was to fill up the IQ first, then go for stats and then more talents at the expensive cost (500) and then maybe a couple of more expensive stats.

So I set the price at 100, so there would be a handful of sessions and everyone would be up to normal starting levels and a pretty decent character.

Maybe 50 or even 25 XP cost is a better target and then give out less XP at the start. Or just say it is a matter of time and in-game opportunity to get talent/spells up to your IQ.

12-30-2019, 06:33 PM	#1
Nils_Lindeberg Join Date: Jul 2018	"Level 0" characters In older versions of D&D we often used the rules for NPC classes. You basically started as an Adept, instead of a Wizard. Then at a certain amount of XP you turned into your real class and started to level up normally. The reason for this was that the description of a Fighter was Veteran. And you already were better than ordinary soldiers. Instead of the more intuitive Zero to Hero, the campaigns were from Pro to Epic Hero. In TFT we have different starting attribute points, 32 being the standard one. But we are going for a a more low and gritty fantasy where a normal civilian farmer don't have IQ9 and 9 points of talents. He is not at his maximum. He could go to school, get into the army, or take up an apprenticeship and have plenty of room to learn new stuff. So if a farmhand has ST11, DX10 and IQ9 and maybe only the Farmhand(1) talent. Sure he might be the farmhand that have taking his mitilia training seriously, or he can be that guy that run back and forth to his family on the other side of the forrest, or the charming guy with Sex Appeal or known for his great hearing or party skill. But more often than not he doesn't have more than one such skill. Leaving a lot of talent points unused. Simulating a future possible hero that just got his call to adventure or is playing through session 0 or -1, he would be about the same. Maybe have a slightly higher potential so a 32 point character. But for the rest these would be my house rules for a "Level 0"-Hero. You start out with 32 points of attributes. You can only fill half of your IQ with talents and spells, round up. You get 1 point of mundane talents for free per 15 years of starting age. Some real talents can be bought this way, eg. Boating for a fisherman, a third weapon talent for a soldier, etc. But no main heroic archetype talents. This is so you can widen your character not focus it harder on one thing. You get one advantage that should be balanced with one disadvantage. You get one smaller cultural bonus that everyone from your subculture gets. It cost only 100XP to get a talent or a spell, if you are below your IQ number of talents. If you raise your IQ, you do not get back any extra talents or spells bought at 500XP, but you might get room for another at 100XP again. This rule will mostly solve the XP advantage of starting with a high IQ. You get 3 Study talents or spells, at maximum your IQ+3. Study talents and spells work on a case by case basis but should get about half effect or an activation roll at 4 vs the attribute or one die worse than the real talent if you have to roll for it. One example could be a spell that you have to cast at 4 dice instead of 3, with an extra penalty on DX if it is above your IQ like a scroll. Apprentice Physicker that heal 1p with a healers kit. A half learned language that gives you basic understanding, but no more and you have to test IQ when something is complex. Sex Appeal, but with an extra die. Charisma that only works if you succeed with a test first. Tactics that work 50% of the time. Etc. I intend to give out at least 100Xp per session at the start, or even more if there are longer downtime where they can earn XP through work and other things. And no, the party will not be sent down into a Death Test type of a labyrinth at the start. It will be a sandbox that starts out really low key. Taking down one angry bear together with half of the village. Look into a mystery with maybe one fight at the end where they have the advantage against one competent person. And so on. Equipment will be equally poor or lacking. In short a call to adventure start where they are mostly civilians, then reluctant heroes to be and finally heroes that accept that they have to go above and beyond what normal people are expected to do. And normal people are mostly just as bad at things. A person that filled out all their talents and has IQ 11 is a professional, even though they might only be a 31 point character. Any thoughts? Is it too harsh? We will be playing bi-weekly and I have had campaigns that last for years, so I want room for improvement over time.

12-30-2019, 06:45 PM	#2
FireHorse Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Dayton, Ohio	Re: "Level 0" characters IF you want to start at Level 0 (so to speak), then this is a good way to do it. I would not want to start from Level 0, though. Fantasy Trip characters seem awfully prone to death even by the normal rules, so starting off even weaker seems a bit masochistic. I would prefer to take the Level 0 phase of development as part of the backstory.

12-30-2019, 07:46 PM	#3
Nils_Lindeberg Join Date: Jul 2018	Re: "Level 0" characters My guess is that they will get a couple of 100 XP after Session 0 and 1, together with 3 Study things and they will be pretty much up to par, power-wise and equipment-wise. But it will never be a dungeon bashing campaign, so they might never even get into a fight for their lives.

12-30-2019, 11:03 PM	#4
Skarg Join Date: May 2015	Re: "Level 0" characters I think most of what you wrote sounds fine and in general I think starting out before you get your stronger abilities tends to be able to make people more connected to their characters (or at least, whatever characters survive...). One of our better campaigns (GURPS, but could've been TFT) started out with typical 15-year-old peasant kids, and ran for about five years. I would tend to not charge even 100 XP to learn most talents up to IQ level total points. I'd tend to have it require time and/or circumstances instead. I'd also tend not to give out 100 XP per session, unless they _are_ quite impressive / dangerous sessions, or sessions that cover a lot of game time. People can learn things without adventuring experience, and using the same XP used to raise attributes presents a dilemma, with attributes being quite tempting. If you are handing out 100 XP per session, many fighter types could be quite happy only spending 1/2 IQ on their (weapon) talents, and putting that straight into raised attributes. In fact it seems like a natural choice, and I think not what you intend. Hence my suggestion to award less XP but not require XP to learn talents.

12-31-2019, 12:02 PM	#5
Nils_Lindeberg Join Date: Jul 2018	Re: "Level 0" characters Excellent point Skarg. I have an XP system for jobs and general downtime, but it might be a tad too generous with a campaign that involves a lot of downtime. I tailored it around the 100 XP mark for filling up your IQ with talents. But you are right, many archetypes that are not talent-focused will jump fairly quickly to 36 point characters and that in turn will raise the difficulty level for fights for everyone. The idea was to fill up the IQ first, then go for stats and then more talents at the expensive cost (500) and then maybe a couple of more expensive stats. So I set the price at 100, so there would be a handful of sessions and everyone would be up to normal starting levels and a pretty decent character. Maybe 50 or even 25 XP cost is a better target and then give out less XP at the start. Or just say it is a matter of time and in-game opportunity to get talent/spells up to your IQ.