Starting level / lethality

[DangerMan]

My friends and I have been playing Rolemaster for some years now, but for various reasons we never seem to reach a higher level that 7th/8th, tops. Most charcters die at around level 5.

I have read some places that some groups have decided to allow the playes to start not at level 1, but some higher level. I am now wondering if this is a good idea?

It seems to me a waste that we never get to enjoy the system in full. The spell lists, eg, go way beyond level 5 and its feel like a waste never to get to try these.

Im thinking the players could start at e.g. level 5.

Any thoughts? 

[LordMiller]

If your players seem to keep dying at level 5, wouldn't that just get them killed sooner? The issue doesn't seem to be starting level, it's more a lethality issue.

Usually, that means either the GM is ramping the combats up too much, too fast, or the players are being too aggressive. . .the system assumes that either you'll be careful, putting more OB into parry and such, or you're going to die when the odds catch up with you.

[DangerMan]

Thanks for the answer!

This is of course a question of lethality. When the players reach level 5, or so, they get more confident. At the same time the GM think they are up to more heavy tasks (I believe, Im a player), and in sum this results in us getting our asses killed. We have discussed this time, and time again, but keep doing the same mistakes. We're a bunch of morons, no doubt

I thought changing the staring level could serve as a quick fix, and allow us to utilize more of the system, but this may be a wrong way to adress the "problem".

All this aside, any thoughts on raising the starting level, in general?

[LordMiller]

Try to assess if the overall problem is not enough OB into parry, or something else, in combat. Like, are the PCs upping parry and still getting killed, in which case the GM needs to ease back on the monsters a bit. .or is it something else, like say spells that keep taking the party down?

You need to really ID the problem before I can suggest a targeted fix.

OTOH, some generica might help:

1) Discussion with the players on using parry more
2) Discussion of tactical play. . .if the players fight in a more coordinated manner it helps a lot.
3) Support characters are often key. . .Like having a healer or cleric handy, with lots of healing spells, can often make a near lethal wound less lethal.

OTOH, it should be noted that a critical will either kill or down you roughly 10% of the time, so if your PC takes at least one critical per combat, the odds on getting killed start to approach 100% at 10 combats. . .In RM you really want to back that off to less than one critical taken per combat to keep alive in a dangerous environment for long.

Personally, for my crew, that means often avoiding combats, definitely avoiding fair fights, and killing monsters by pushing rocks off a cliff, ambushing them, shooting them at range before they can attack back, stabbing them in the back or killing them in their sleep are all perfectly acceptable. Honorable/chivelrous combat in RM is a recipie for a short life.

[Rick Hansen]

Honorable/chivelrous combat in RM is a recipie for a short life.

I think this phrase is the best advice to give to any RM player.

[DangerMan]

The PCs do of course use part of their OB to parry, but we've never had any clerics or healers. None of us seem to want to have that role. Right now we do however have to PCs with the arcane healing list (an arcanist and a magician with the "Arcane discovery" talent). We also try various tactics to avoid face to face combat, e.g. ambushing, which is sometimes fruitful, and sometimes not.

What usually takes us out is either a staright high roll on a critical, or us going into some cave og building to get some treasure or information.

At this point Im playing av sixth level magician, and thus statistically Im doomed 

[Rick Hansen]

Perhaps you can incorporate some sort of fate point sytem to your game. That should at least dull the sharp edge of a high critical.

[LordMiller]

Fate points, especially with the exchange in place between foes/PCs does do a lot to ease the fatalities, without making things too easy.

Spending some of your loot on Herbs or potions, if such are available, would be another good idea.

[rdanhenry]

You could always try recruiting an NPC Healer if nobody wants to play one. (Also, First Aid should be a very common skill among those who "adventure" for a living. You can never have too much healing.) For that matter, a group of NPC men-at-arms would be a good investment. Not because they'll be that useful in fights (although numbers are very important in gaining battlefield superiority in RM), but because if there are a lot of potential combatants, the GM will want to avoid running a combat. 

[DangerMan]

We do use a fate point system. But, Im not shure what you mean by this : "especially with the exchange in place between foes/PCs".

We also have some ranks in first aid (of course :-)) and do spend quite a lot of our money on herbs.

Recruting a NPCs healer and/or soldiers might be a good advice, if our GM will "allow" it

[dutch206]

The PCs do of course use part of their OB to parry, but we've never had any clerics or healers. None of us seem to want to have that role. Right now we do however have to PCs with the arcane healing list (an arcanist and a magician with the "Arcane discovery" talent). We also try various tactics to avoid face to face combat, e.g. ambushing, which is sometimes fruitful, and sometimes not.

What usually takes us out is either a staright high roll on a critical, or us going into some cave og building to get some treasure or information.

At this point Im playing av sixth level magician, and thus statistically Im doomed 

Never had a cleric?    Bingo!  Problem identified.  Clerics get to repel undead, remove curses, cure diseases, neutralize poisons, heal wounds, and restore the dead to life.  (Plus, they get to wear armor.)  Clerics rock!

All fantasy adventures are written with the assumption that your party includes the four basic monster food groups:  A warrior, someone who can deal with traps, a healer, and a mage of some sort.

Also, if you are letting your mage get into Melee combat, you are doing something wrong.  Mages are "Glass Cannons".

[LordMiller]

The fate exchange was a concept from one of the companions, I believe the Channeling Companion.

It does give a bit of a cinematic feel to play, raising both PC and NPC survival rates.

Your PCs start with a limited quantity of Fate points per normal, as can given significant NPCs.

Any time someone spends a fate point, the attacker who's roll was negated gains one fate point. It's sort of Karmic balance.

As always, the fate points keep the PCs alive, but in exchange, that assassin/dragon/evil cultist now has a fate point.

On the flip side, when the Assassin is fleeing and a PC puts a fatal arrow into them and they spend a fate point to survive and get away, the fact that the PC gains a fate point makes them less surly about being "robbed" of a kill.

I've found the method has all the advantages of standard fate points, but also aids campaign development, in that it's also less lethal on your recurring villains without having to resort to railroading, deus ex machina, or other player irritating mechanisms.

[jasonbrisbane]

We always allow the New character to start at the lowest level of the party.

So if the PC's are of Levels 2,4,5,6 and the level 5 characer dies he starts at the beginning of Level 2, the lowest level of the current party member.

[Rage]

I introduced a spin on the Fate Point system some 20 years ago...
Characters were facing an untimely death and given the plethora of additional and optional rules we used (still use), it was taking hours for a player to create a new character.

I wanted my players to become attached to their characters, to play them for a long time and to enjoy the game, so I introduced something of a get out clause.

I created a new statistic - 'Luck'

Starting characters rolled the stat and potential, just like they would any other stat. At any time a player wanted to avoid a situation they didn't like (anything from fumbling a roll to a death crit) they would simple roll under the Luck stat. If successful, 2 things would happen: I would adjust the situation, basically toning down the bad stuff and in some cases ignoring it altogether, and the player would decrease his Luck stat by the amount he rolled. Luck is replenished at each level by 15 points, as usual to a maximum of the character's potential.

...but what happens if the player fudges the roll or the character has next to little to no Luck remaining?

This is the thing that turned the system around. We had a situation, a character was going down, he had used his luck previously had had little remaining, he fudged his roll and failed. The party knew that if this one guy went down, they'd be screwed too (I can't recall the exact situation - it was decades ago). So one player piped up and announced that he would roll on his Luck to save his comrade (and subsequently save the day). I thought about it, we discussed it at length, and I made that magical ruling: Players can use their own Luck to help other party members.

The end result became something almost like a pool of Luck. It's up to each individual whether or not to use their own Luck or not, but in most situations, most of my players help each other out.

We've had many moments full of suspense as a character has taken a death crit and failed his Luck Roll. With baited breath players volunteer to save their comrade, each in turn rolling the dice...sometimes, they all fail, sometimes they have used up their luck already, sometimes, but only sometimes....a character dies.

Hope this helps 

[Fidoric]

For the starting level, it all depends on the qualification you want for your PCs. As I see it, a 1st to 3rd (or even 6th) level character is a apprentice, between 4th and 7th, he becomes a journeyman. A true master of the trade, well... later.
Of course, those levels indications are just that, indications...
I am not very sure of those levels as I haven't played RM in years, playing Harp now. But consider making for example a fully skilled knight with good skill at (several) weapons, riding, armors, diplomacy, heraldry... I think you will need to wait until level 6 or 7 before being  fully proficient in the expected skills.
Back to the original question, I think it perfectly correct to start after level 1. If you want to play a knight, a decent mage and a anointed priest, you should probably make them level 5 or so. At level one, they should be squire, apprentice and young acolyte...