How to handle new players (xp+advancement)

[Glorelendil]

But maybe less rewarding for the player in the long run.

[Greenwolf]

Hey thanks for all your replies guys, I'll be sure to take it all on board when a new player joins the group.

The other thing i wanted to ask is when an experienced player joins your existing campaign, do you let them bring there existing characters across(From other games & other groups), or do they roll up new ones?

[Glorelendil]

Hey thanks for all your replies guys, I'll be sure to take it all on board when a new player joins the group.

The other thing i wanted to ask is when an experienced player joins your existing campaign, do you let them bring there existing characters across(From other games & other groups), or do they roll up new ones?

For pre-Rivendell characters that amounts to the same thing as giving them bonus AP/XP.

[Stormcrow]

If everyone is playing the same (published) adventures, you're going to have a hard time reconciling the fact that both parties managed to, say, rescue Oin and Balin from the Marsh-dwellers, or even worse when you start duplicating Tales from Wilderland and the like.

On the other hand, if both groups have participated in entirely different adventures, and if they're in the same year, I see no reason not to let them join together. Finding out about other things going on in the campaign world is part of what makes a game have more depth, especially if you know the Loremaster didn't just make it up whole-cloth for your benefit.

[zedturtle]

If everyone is playing the same (published) adventures, you're going to have a hard time reconciling the fact that both parties managed to, say, rescue Oin and Balin from the Marsh-dwellers, or even worse when you start duplicating Tales from Wilderland and the like.

On the other hand, if both groups have participated in entirely different adventures, and if they're in the same year, I see no reason not to let them join together. Finding out about other things going on in the campaign world is part of what makes a game have more depth, especially if you know the Loremaster didn't just make it up whole-cloth for your benefit.

I'm now running two PbP games and they are explicitly in the same continuity. I imagine that this is a little overwhelming for the newer group, but I really like the world-building possibilities. It does put a good chunk of Tales off the table, but there are several adventures that I haven't run that could be adapted for their use. Plus, Darkening and my own stuff...

[Majestic]

One of my players decided to 'retire' his existing PC and start playing a new one. Being as we've only played a few adventures, I think I'm going to hold off on giving him any XP/AP (that is, nothing more than the XP beginning characters get). I don't think this will be any kind of problem, and most of the PCs are "new" enough that there shouldn't be much disparity in how accomplished and competent they all are.

And I agree that you could definitely try to incorporate characters from another campaign, provided they are close enough time-wise and haven't participated in the same adventures as your existing PCs. Another thing to keep in mind is what adventures you plan on running. If you were all set to start running Tales from Wilderland, for example, and the new player had already played through some (or all) of those, that could be a problem, too. The player could be asked to not 'spoil' anything, but it would be strange for his character to participate in events he or she already participated in (and got XP and AP for).

[HotSnow50]

...but it would be strange for his character to participate in events he or she already participated in (and got XP and AP for).

Why though, couldn't you just pretend they hadn't?

[Majestic]

...but it would be strange for his character to participate in events he or she already participated in (and got XP and AP for).

Why though, couldn't you just pretend they hadn't?

Sure you could. But trust me, as someone who's run a number of extremely long campaigns (my current supers game has been regularly played for 23 years), it ends up being a 'can of worms'. It has the potential to really be confusing for everyone. You could easily end up with (just as an example):

"Oh yeah, my character has known Elrond for years; he's visited the Last Homely House a dozen times!"

"No, remember, none of that actually happened."

Honestly, if you're going to just throw out nearly the entire backstory of a character (which is more vivid than a simple composed paragraph or two backgrounds - like we get out for the cultural templates in the rules - being as the player has actually played through and lived it), why not just make the character similar. Perhaps use the same name and general idea. But if 90% of that character's 'memories' (from actual play) are going to be stuff that didn't really happen, then why not just make a new character to begin with?

[Hermes Serpent]

If you make the new character a relative of the old one then they can have the memories of the stories as told by their relative of all the previous encounters or at least the major/high points.

[Valarian]

Just have new characters join the experienced group; don't worry about any kind of mythical "balance." Characters are not geometrically more and more powerful as they are in D&D, and it suits the source material anyway. (Seriously. A couple of hobbits in their tweens adventuring alongside an angelic being and the future king of the entire West? No problem.)

I've done this in the past ... just added a new character to the group without any additional XP bonuses. However, I would consider giving a few additional character building points, maybe 15 or 20 build points instead of the default 10. This would allow the new character to begin with a little more experience than the standard new build character.