Why don't most games start off at level 1?

Because in most D&D games level 1 characters are very squishy. But if your players are smart enough it should be an issue.

They don't?

Huh. All of mine have.

>>52239847
Because most game systems don't even have "levels" as defined by D&D.

>>52239899
Same

I wish more started slightly higher level, or with competent gms who wouldn't do a half assed challenge to 'grind' us higher instantly

Because characters made exactly by the book often feel slightly too weak for the fluff they're given. Putting them two or three levels (Or a number of sessions worth of XP more) above starting makes them feel appropriately competent in many systems.

>>52239847
Because first level combat in D&D manages to be both boring and horrendously lethal. Starting off at level 3 or 4 is when characters start to feel unique, and gives a sense of competence to them.

>>52239847
Most do.

In a lot of systems they're pretty barebones and dull and serving the purpose of teaching new players.
This is really easily demonstrated with the progression of Rogues in D&D 5e - at first level you start with just Sneak Attack, a largely passive ability that's easy to understand.
At level 2 you get Cunning Action, a more complex active ability that gives you several options which you'll probably learn to use every round.
Then at level 3 you get to choose your archetype, giving your first chance to make a big customization decision beyond just race and class.

If you threw all of this stuff onto a level 1 character it'd be overwhelming for new players, but if your players have been in games before it makes these early levels seem overly simple and dull.

Because in order to gain exp, you need to fight. Which means overpower something, meaning you need to be stronger than something.
How can you overpower something if you're not superior?

Because of shit players who are only playing for a power fantasy
See >>52239962 >>52239988
Their complaints are that there character isn't as competent as they want them to be
Instead of scaling back their expectations of what a person new to adventuring is, they demand the game adapts to what they feel like they want to be able to do. Basic entitlement complex.

Basically, class system is shit. Point buy would solve this problem.

>>52240096
>Basically, class system is shit. Point buy would solve this problem.
It's funny. People shit on class systems, yet when presented with their generic systems they always end up building characters along the same archetypes and builds that they would have used in a class-based system.

>>52240096
this is only because of the HP pool and some feat taxes (like weapon finesse) if these didn't exist as problems the issues you are describing would be less prevelant because there would not be things like those proping them up.

>>52240096
>Instead of scaling back their expectations of what a person new to adventuring is
Your assumption is that all starting characters are brand new to their profession or situation. Most games say otherwise.

>>52240096
Yo fuck off, nobody has fun when a character dies at level 1.

I agree that D&D is shit though.

>>52240096
Not every game is D&D. Many characters are supposed to have already done a notable amount of stuff at the time of game start, even if they're level 1 or equivalent.

But many games make them incompetent for the amount of stated experience they have. Most editions of Shadowrun are pretty egregious examples. You're supposed to be elite right from the start, but most starting characters are barely even competent and have an unreliable ability to do basic functions of their job unless you minmax. Then they're really good at one thing and incompetent at everything else.

>>52239847
Because level based games are bad.

>>52239905
But the overwhelming majority of games are D&D.

Like, nothing else even comes close. You can put every other RPG on the other side of the scale, and there's still more people playing games of D&D than all those combined.

have you tried not playing d&d

>>52239847
because your wizard has a d4 hit points

also most good games involve pointbuy

What's with this weird anti-D&D spam fag?
Doesn't he have anything better to do than complain about what other people play?

Shoo.

>>52240263
Reverse bait, nice

>>52240290
Shoo. Enough with your "HOW DARE ANYONE MENTION ANYTHING RELATED TO D&D!" bullshit already.

File: 1488737523741.jpg (108KB, 600x535px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 600x535px

>>52240307

>>52240096

In many cases I'd agree with you, to a point. No one likes the guy who wants to start the game with all the cool stuff having already happened in his backstory.

But at the same time, there's a serious dissonance between who D&D says 1st Level characters should be and what they actually are. The whole idea behind adventurers is they're a cut above the rest. Feeling your character shouldn't be a total nosebleed is reasonable. It's just practical. Even the Orphan Farmboy in most hero's journey stories brings more to the table than a 1st Level character.

I find 3rd level is the ideal starting point.