Forums » General Pantheon Discussion

How long should level 1 take ?

    • 793 posts
    July 19, 2017 1:20 PM PDT

    Level 1 should be somewhat quick. Quick enough to do in a single play session for a beginner. You want them to experience that first "ding!!", then the levels can start to space out and get longer, but that first sense of accomplishment is critical to retaining new players.

    • 33 posts
    July 19, 2017 1:46 PM PDT

    I think it is important to have to spend enough time in an area to gain knowledge of the area in order to work out ways to expand your reach. If you can level too quickly and outpace the area design as such, then it takes away from the experience. Things just need to have a feel of progression; be it level, equipment gain, skill gain, etc. As was mentioned before, level is just a number with some bonuses attached. There are many ways to accomplish the same "feel"

    • 3237 posts
    July 19, 2017 2:59 PM PDT

    Fluffy said:

    Levels often imply that content is not equally fine to progress your character ,levels imply that there is a "good" and "bad" area to progress in.
    And therefore players start to focus on which zone will help them to advance the fastest
    The adventure itself is ruined then.Because a level system linked to zones tries to set up a "right" path for you.It tries to controle you.
    On adventures there is no right or wrong path as the outcome of your choices always is uncertain.The uncertain nature is what makes an adventure
    Adventures make content king,but levels make destination(endgame) king ,instead of the journey.
    So that is why I think they'll have to make  a choice here;adventure where content is king or a level system where endgame(or best area to get goodies and advance) is king

    Having levels doesen't force or control people.  People control themselves.  One person may decide to go the optimal path while another completely ignores it.  Even if you take away levels and replace them with adventures, there will still be an "optimal" path that leads toward faster progression.  I think it's human nature to take the path of least resistance more often than not.  FFXI is a great example of a game that used levels for both a primary and sub-class, and where content was truly king.  At any given point in time you could be focusing on one of your sub-classes in a lower level area, but still feel like you are progressing that "end-game" that you speak of.

    It's all relative and I really hope that progeny is used as a feature to help encourage folks who don't roll alts to relevel and check out parts of the world they may have missed on their first run.  I am not personally a fan of having to sacrifice a character to be able to do that, but I'm sure myself and many others will share that as feedback when we actually get to test the system as it's designed.  FFXI set the bar extremely high with it's subclass system and how it tied into the overall replay value of the game.  I'm really surprised that more games have not attempted to imitate how it worked ... it was truly awesome.


    This post was edited by oneADseven at July 19, 2017 3:02 PM PDT
    • 542 posts
    July 20, 2017 6:48 AM PDT

    The path can remain uncertain when "danger lurks around every corner" of the way.
    I don't think they'll have an optimal path to choose in this case.Because any path would involve great risk. And no certain success chance without levels and experience gain
    Dangers and trap lurk behind every corner thus it becomes a real adventure;players can't just rush - they'd fall in a pit as soon as they try to run to endgame sort to speak.
    You'll never see levels in a good adventure game because it is either about that or the adventure (where the content of the moment matters)

    Subconciously levels control players.Like how a lady might control her man by the promise of sexy times.Leaving the mind of men too clouded because they are obsessed with desire (in this case achieving the highest level)
    I might argue that level systems and adventures are mutual exclusive ,as both are a very different beast, have a very different focus point;adventure games being about the journey itself which levels won't let happen.
    Levels do not fit an adventurous game because they imply there is an optimal path to follow.While an adventure game is about figuring it out each time you travel.
    Was watching a youtube stream feeling all nostalgic about Quest for glory
    and at a point in this video it solidified my belief that levels are bad if you want to achieve creating an adventure where the journey matters most.

    Or maybe it is just that an adventure game demands a different kind of progression system,like they mention in this video;advance your climbing, swimming.But not having those "overall levels"

    The idea of the progeny system I like a lot.But will there also be birthdays,or some kind of reward for players that do decide to stay loyal to the character they have I wonder.


    This post was edited by Fluffy at July 20, 2017 6:57 AM PDT
    • 626 posts
    July 20, 2017 7:07 AM PDT

    VizualAbstract said:

    I've noticed in games where levels came on quicker, I ran through content instead of being forced to enjoy it. EQ 1 took quite a while to level, forcing me to really explore the content and different zones, camps. I think I spent several weeks in Greater Faydark, even had someone guide me to the Commonlands and continue my progression there. If I quickly leveled to 15, I doubt I'd really create as many memories of those starting zones as I had.

    Many other games have never left me with that impact. If leveling will take that long, there has to be enough content to keep a person enteretained, otherwise the sense of grind may get to some people and turn them away.

     

    Well said! I never thought about it as much but this is so true! Most memories I have in EQ were while Leveling! I loved it as it never felt like leveling, but inside it was just playing the game! Then again in WoW I only member hating leveling even though it took no time at all to level I felt it was boring! The Ding meant nothing to me anymore, no one was around to share the experience with, and dieing wasn't feared so I just ran around like a crazy man pulling as much as I could to kill as fast as I could... In EQ I remember even at level 7 in Crushbone being very careful with my pulls, grouping with a few friends to move around the zone slowly, and trying our best to avoid trains. Killing Lord Darish with a group at lvl 10 was something to celebrate, and don't get me started on Ambassador DVinn! These are memories of I'll keep forever, and I hadn't even gotten out of the starting area for my Wood Elf yet... That is the type of game I'm hoping for. I don't want to think of it as leveling, but as playing. I want to look forward to getting on at night as a lvl 23 and excited to try to take down a dungeon with friends! 

    • 1399 posts
    July 20, 2017 9:11 AM PDT

    The question of this thread is somewhat misleading. I belive what is being asked is "how much combat time should level one take?"

    I look back on my EQ experiance and as a very patient person, and one with little desire to get to "end game" I seriously ran arround Felwith and Kethelen finding the other zones and the spires, speaking with every NPC in the place before ever even going out to fight. I may have went out and killed a few things, I fought if attacked, but it was all about exploring to me. I literally did this until my initial food supply was exausted. I don't know the usage rate of a stack of food and water but that could EASILY have been 8 hours.

    The time it takes to reach level 2 is going to vary greatly  based on play style. I don't agree it needs to be fast to retain customers. I belive if they're too impatient and need a "Ding" to level two then maybe they're simply going to be too impatient for Pantheon. VR is not making a game for everyone, to lure them in with a quick level then spread it out in the later levels just sounds to me like a dishonest case of "Bait and Switch" in the name of profits. And I myself hope VR doesn't do business like that, or we all may be disappointed.


    This post was edited by Zorkon at July 20, 2017 9:15 AM PDT
    • 168 posts
    July 20, 2017 5:14 PM PDT

    How long does it take to get from level 1 to level 2 in a D&D campaign? .. That would probably be a pretty good judge on the level spread they could be using. As D&D's leveling system seems to have been well thought out and gaged to maximize the enjoyment of each of the levels. It gives you plenty of time to learn how to utilize all your new abilities and strengths effectively in various scenarios, before progressing you to the next level.

    • 2130 posts
    July 20, 2017 5:52 PM PDT

    Zorkon said:

    The question of this thread is somewhat misleading. I belive what is being asked is "how much combat time should level one take?"

    I look back on my EQ experiance and as a very patient person, and one with little desire to get to "end game" I seriously ran arround Felwith and Kethelen finding the other zones and the spires, speaking with every NPC in the place before ever even going out to fight. I may have went out and killed a few things, I fought if attacked, but it was all about exploring to me. I literally did this until my initial food supply was exausted. I don't know the usage rate of a stack of food and water but that could EASILY have been 8 hours.

    The time it takes to reach level 2 is going to vary greatly  based on play style. I don't agree it needs to be fast to retain customers. I belive if they're too impatient and need a "Ding" to level two then maybe they're simply going to be too impatient for Pantheon. VR is not making a game for everyone, to lure them in with a quick level then spread it out in the later levels just sounds to me like a dishonest case of "Bait and Switch" in the name of profits. And I myself hope VR doesn't do business like that, or we all may be disappointed.

    Disagree completely. The title isn't misleading at all.

    I would hope that things are balanced around the above average paced players, otherwise things will progress way too fast.

    In other words, when I (and many others) load up Pantheon, I'll be slaughtering everything in sight to level as soon as possible. In EQ you could ding to level 2 in 10 minutes of slaughtering every white con mob in the vicinity of where you started. I think that's a pretty reasonable pace, if not a little slow.

    I find it interesting that you say things vary based on playstyle, then seemingly say that some playstyles are invalid. I play games for progression and to be among the best, which means a quick pace. Some people in EQ did the same. This game isn't for me? Please.

    • 94 posts
    July 20, 2017 7:39 PM PDT

    Level 1 to level 2 should take as long as it takes. What I mean is that some ppl will let others kill everything while others will explore. Some may go up to every single npc and see about quests so when they start the killing they might have picked up quests that give money or small items. As Zorkon said, playstyle will determine how long it takes ppl to level. At the same time like Liav said you will have some ppl that just kill everything in sight IF possible meaning ppl may be fighting over every skeleton or wasp that flies by. Either way your playstyle will determine how fast you level. Zorkon is a casual leveler while Liav is a powerleveler. Neither is wrong and neither is right. Everybody plays at their own pace for various reasons which are all valid.

    • 2130 posts
    July 20, 2017 7:57 PM PDT

    sunstalkr said:

    Level 1 to level 2 should take as long as it takes. What I mean is that some ppl will let others kill everything while others will explore. Some may go up to every single npc and see about quests so when they start the killing they might have picked up quests that give money or small items. As Zorkon said, playstyle will determine how long it takes ppl to level. At the same time like Liav said you will have some ppl that just kill everything in sight IF possible meaning ppl may be fighting over every skeleton or wasp that flies by. Either way your playstyle will determine how fast you level. Zorkon is a casual leveler while Liav is a powerleveler. Neither is wrong and neither is right. Everybody plays at their own pace for various reasons which are all valid.

    This doesn't really answer the question, though.

    If a mob is worth 5 xp and you need 100 xp to advanced from level 1 to 2, and it takes 45 seconds to kill a mob with 15 seconds in between fights, then it would take 20 minutes. If there isn't as much competition for mobs, it might take 17 minutes.

    This is why it's important to determine your target for balance. If you aim at the slowest players, the fastest players will be 50 in a few days.

    The devs have access to the numbers, so it shouldn't be hard for them to calculate how much time it would take if you were maximally efficient. No one is maximally efficient though, so they'd probably aim a little lower than that and call it a day if I had to guess.

     


    This post was edited by Liav at July 20, 2017 7:58 PM PDT
    • 1399 posts
    July 20, 2017 8:29 PM PDT

    Liav said:

    Zorkon said:

    The question of this thread is somewhat misleading. I belive what is being asked is "how much combat time should level one take?"

    I look back on my EQ experiance and as a very patient person, and one with little desire to get to "end game" I seriously ran arround Felwith and Kethelen finding the other zones and the spires, speaking with every NPC in the place before ever even going out to fight. I may have went out and killed a few things, I fought if attacked, but it was all about exploring to me. I literally did this until my initial food supply was exausted. I don't know the usage rate of a stack of food and water but that could EASILY have been 8 hours.

    The time it takes to reach level 2 is going to vary greatly  based on play style. I don't agree it needs to be fast to retain customers. I belive if they're too impatient and need a "Ding" to level two then maybe they're simply going to be too impatient for Pantheon. VR is not making a game for everyone, to lure them in with a quick level then spread it out in the later levels just sounds to me like a dishonest case of "Bait and Switch" in the name of profits. And I myself hope VR doesn't do business like that, or we all may be disappointed.

    Disagree completely. The title isn't misleading at all.

    I would hope that things are balanced around the above average paced players, otherwise things will progress way too fast.

    In other words, when I (and many others) load up Pantheon, I'll be slaughtering everything in sight to level as soon as possible. In EQ you could ding to level 2 in 10 minutes of slaughtering every white con mob in the vicinity of where you started. I think that's a pretty reasonable pace, if not a little slow.

    I find it interesting that you say things vary based on playstyle, then seemingly say that some playstyles are invalid. I play games for progression and to be among the best, which means a quick pace. Some people in EQ did the same. This game isn't for me? Please.

    I'm courious, where did you get the impression I said "seemingly say that some playstyles are invalid" ?

    That was not my intent, and I read back through my post and dident see that anyplace.

    • 2130 posts
    July 20, 2017 8:32 PM PDT

    Zorkon said:

    I'm courious, where did you get the impression I said "seemingly say that some playstyles are invalid" ?

    That was not my intent, and I read back through my post and dident see that anyplace.

    This line in particular: "I belive if they're too impatient and need a "Ding" to level two then maybe they're simply going to be too impatient for Pantheon."

    Progression is the only reason I play MMOs, that includes getting levels as fast as possible.

    • 521 posts
    July 20, 2017 9:02 PM PDT

    I think that some of the problem can be alleviated by removing the immediate Feedback given to the player. Currently in most MMOs when a player kills an enemy, a specific amount of XP gained is shown in the combat log, or displayed on screen as floating numbers. This allows for meta/power gamers to formulate the Fastest XP per hour Rituals.

    There is one game ( I wont mention) daring to take another path by not allowing any of that information to be displayed instantly, instead giving the player daily updates on their progress in the form of a letter showing the accomplishments during the last day’s play session, a summary of your rewards ect.. but not you killed 10 rats for 1000 XP.

    The game should feel like a living breathing world I want to interact with, and engage in conversation with the players and NPC’s, removing the specific details of how exactly I got the XP I earned would help to blur the lines, increasing immersion with the added difficulty to power leveling with any certainty of accuracy.

    I’m not suggesting VR take the exact method I mentioned, but maybe something that achieves the same result.


    This post was edited by HemlockReaper at July 20, 2017 9:49 PM PDT
    • 2130 posts
    July 20, 2017 9:29 PM PDT

    It doesn't matter if values are displayed or not. It seems to be a common sentiment that hiding values will somehow prevent people from figuring out the best ways to do things. It won't.

    It's not hard to figure out optimal leveling strategies. Not only that but I would hope that multiple mobs of the same level throughout the world would be worth comparable XP. Otherwise, you're invalidating content from the start because no one wants to level in an area with inferior XP.

    • 1399 posts
    July 20, 2017 9:51 PM PDT

    Liav said:

    Zorkon said:

    I'm courious, where did you get the impression I said "seemingly say that some playstyles are invalid" ?

    That was not my intent, and I read back through my post and dident see that anyplace.

    This line in particular: "I belive if they're too impatient and need a "Ding" to level two then maybe they're simply going to be too impatient for Pantheon."

    Progression is the only reason I play MMOs, that includes getting levels as fast as possible.

    I see, my comment was intended more twords VR designing level one abnormally quick as opposed to other levels, as I understood some others were suggesting. If a player wants to power through it, go for it, I expect 90% or better will (besides I may need you to bust ass to 10 to help me on a corpse run tomarrow). I just think VR should space all levels based on whatever formula they choose and NOT make level one a easy two hour level to lure people in and give them a false impression of what the rest of the game will be.

    Bait and Switch = a bad practice for them to get into.  Imho

    • 521 posts
    July 20, 2017 9:53 PM PDT

    Liav said:

    It doesn't matter if values are displayed or not. It seems to be a common sentiment that hiding values will somehow prevent people from figuring out the best ways to do things. It won't.

    It's not hard to figure out optimal leveling strategies. Not only that but I would hope that multiple mobs of the same level throughout the world would be worth comparable XP. Otherwise, you're invalidating content from the start because no one wants to level in an area with inferior XP.

     

    Great! So your in agreement, we don't need the numbers.

    • 1399 posts
    July 20, 2017 10:15 PM PDT

    Liav said:

    It doesn't matter if values are displayed or not. It seems to be a common sentiment that hiding values will somehow prevent people from figuring out the best ways to do things. It won't.

    It's not hard to figure out optimal leveling strategies. Not only that but I would hope that multiple mobs of the same level throughout the world would be worth comparable XP. Otherwise, you're invalidating content from the start because no one wants to level in an area with inferior XP.

    Ahh, the road less traveled... count me in!

    • 2130 posts
    July 20, 2017 10:26 PM PDT

    HemlockReaper said:

    Great! So your in agreement, we don't need the numbers.

    I don't really think the conversation is about needs one way or the other. I don't think it makes sense to frame things that way.

    Zorkon said:

    Liav said:

    It doesn't matter if values are displayed or not. It seems to be a common sentiment that hiding values will somehow prevent people from figuring out the best ways to do things. It won't.

    It's not hard to figure out optimal leveling strategies. Not only that but I would hope that multiple mobs of the same level throughout the world would be worth comparable XP. Otherwise, you're invalidating content from the start because no one wants to level in an area with inferior XP.

    Ahh, the road less traveled... count me in!

    Let me correct myself. Those of us who care about maximizing our XP intake will essentially be forced to pass on content if it is arbitrarily designed to be worse than other sources.

    The ZEM in EQ is a total failure of a mechanic, in my opinion, because of this reason. If I care about leveling I have to hard pass on 75% of the game content because non-dungeon XP sources aren't worth the time.


    This post was edited by Liav at July 20, 2017 10:40 PM PDT
    • 521 posts
    July 20, 2017 11:03 PM PDT

    Liav said:

    I don't really think the conversation is about needs one way or the other. I don't think it makes sense to frame things that way.

     

    I wasn't framing anything, if your truly don't need the information then why would you resist the suggestion to remove it?

    My stance on the subject is, without the immediate confirmation on what caused specific XP gains, it would be a lot easier for developers to make changes secretly behind the scenes to thwart power levelers if XP gains were delayed for a day or so.

    This certainly may not fit the vision for the game, but I think VR is quite capable of deciding the merits of my suggestion for themselves.


    This post was edited by HemlockReaper at July 20, 2017 11:03 PM PDT
    • 2130 posts
    July 20, 2017 11:34 PM PDT

    HemlockReaper said:

    I wasn't framing anything, if your truly don't need the information then why would you resist the suggestion to remove it?

    My stance on the subject is, without the immediate confirmation on what caused specific XP gains, it would be a lot easier for developers to make changes secretly behind the scenes to thwart power levelers if XP gains were delayed for a day or so.

    This certainly may not fit the vision for the game, but I think VR is quite capable of deciding the merits of my suggestion for themselves.

    I haven't yet advocated for its removal or its inclusion. I was simply pointing out that it won't have the effect you outlined before, as it will be easily found out which XP spots have higher yields regardless.

    Now you've changed your argument to saying that you want the numbers hidden so that VR can tweak numbers on the fly to penalize people who level efficiently. I think that's a terrible idea. Under no circumstances do I find it acceptable to impede efficient players to satisfy casuals.

    If you want my argument for the inclusion of numbers, it's pretty simple. Having numbers available to players also simplifies the process of identifying bugs or other unintended behaviors in the game. Ideally, the experience from a mob of a given level will be identical to another, regardless of where you are. I don't want to have content effectively made obsolete from the start by arbitrarily having varying XP levels.

    VR is plenty of capable of making educated decisions, which is the entire reason that I argue on these forums in the first place. Leave no stone unturned.

    I'm against the ambiguity of low level information for numerous reasons. I don't trust any developer to get things right the first time, and having tons of hidden math behind the scenes gives developers a lot of leeway to be lazy or outright neglectful. I'm not saying that the Pantheon dev team will necessarily be that way, but I've been burned before.


    This post was edited by Liav at July 20, 2017 11:37 PM PDT
    • 521 posts
    July 21, 2017 12:12 AM PDT

    Liav said:

    HemlockReaper said:

    I wasn't framing anything, if your truly don't need the information then why would you resist the suggestion to remove it?

    My stance on the subject is, without the immediate confirmation on what caused specific XP gains, it would be a lot easier for developers to make changes secretly behind the scenes to thwart power levelers if XP gains were delayed for a day or so.

    This certainly may not fit the vision for the game, but I think VR is quite capable of deciding the merits of my suggestion for themselves.

    I haven't yet advocated for its removal or its inclusion. I was simply pointing out that it won't have the effect you outlined before, as it will be easily found out which XP spots have higher yields regardless.

    Now you've changed your argument to saying that you want the numbers hidden so that VR can tweak numbers on the fly to penalize people who level efficiently. I think that's a terrible idea. Under no circumstances do I find it acceptable to impede efficient players to satisfy casuals.

    If you want my argument for the inclusion of numbers, it's pretty simple. Having numbers available to players also simplifies the process of identifying bugs or other unintended behaviors in the game. Ideally, the experience from a mob of a given level will be identical to another, regardless of where you are. I don't want to have content effectively made obsolete from the start by arbitrarily having varying XP levels.

    VR is plenty of capable of making educated decisions, which is the entire reason that I argue on these forums in the first place. Leave no stone unturned.

    I'm against the ambiguity of low level information for numerous reasons. I don't trust any developer to get things right the first time, and having tons of hidden math behind the scenes gives developers a lot of leeway to be lazy or outright neglectful. I'm not saying that the Pantheon dev team will necessarily be that way, but I've been burned before.

     

    I didn't change my argument, I gave you a reason why I'm for it. I feel power levelers are a blight on MMO Games, because they rush though content, often skipping much of it, then complain about the lack of content. I want the journey to max level to be slow, and if developers can make alterations to XP on certain mobs (behind the scenes) targeted by power levelers because their most efficient, then I say let the Dev's keep them guessing.

    The longer it takes players to hit max level the more time devs have to make new content and stay ahead of the level cap.

    • 2130 posts
    July 21, 2017 12:39 AM PDT

    HemlockReaper said:

    I didn't change my argument, I gave you a reason why I'm for it. I feel power levelers are a blight on MMO Games, because they rush though content, often skipping much of it, then complain about the lack of content. I want the journey to max level to be slow, and if developers can make alterations to XP on certain mobs (behind the scenes) targeted by power levelers because their most efficient, then I say let the Dev's keep them guessing.

    The longer it takes players to hit max level the more time devs have to make new content and stay ahead of the level cap.

    You went from "we don't need numbers" to "numbers shouldn't be visible so the devs can tweak values behind the scenes when people level at a rate I consider to be too fast". I don't know what else to say with regards to that.

    You seem overly concerned with what other players do. If I consume content quickly and burn out, that's a me problem, not a you problem. In reality, every MMO I've ever played has burned me out because I reach the top, farm the same content, get geared, then play something else until an expansion hits.

    If the devs reduce XP in some place, people will migrate to the next quickest place to level. Reducing XP because a specific demographic of players levels faster than others is laughable. Why should I bother putting effort into the game if my progress is artificially restricted in such a way that it isn't rewarded?

    What do you define as powerleveling, anyway? Fast leveling is relative. If 70% of the playerbase levels at X rate because they only play the game for two hours a day after work, I'm going to be blazing past that. If you're referring to high level players helping low level players level faster, you can design game mechanics to prevent that if it's even desirable to do so in the first place.


    This post was edited by Liav at July 21, 2017 12:39 AM PDT
    • 521 posts
    July 21, 2017 1:10 AM PDT

    Liav said:

    You went from "we don't need numbers" to "numbers shouldn't be visible so the devs can tweak values behind the scenes when people level at a rate I consider to be too fast". I don't know what else to say with regards to that.

    I'm sorry your not understanding. The only reason to “need” a number is to gauge the progress, which also promotes power levelers who will target the most efficient way to level regardless of fun factor. The option for devs to tweak behind the scenes is just a another Reason in addition too, not instead of, making it less obvious which path is most efficient, I also feel it makes it more immersive by not having the information, but lets move on.

    • 2130 posts
    July 21, 2017 1:35 AM PDT

    HemlockReaper said:

    I'm sorry your not understanding. The only reason to “need” a number is to gauge the progress, which also promotes power levelers who will target the most efficient way to level regardless of fun factor. The option for devs to tweak behind the scenes is just a another Reason in addition too, not instead of, making it less obvious which path is most efficient, I also feel it makes it more immersive by not having the information, but lets move on.

    I've already addressed this.

    Having XP values published in a numerical format, while relatively simpler, does not in any way mitigate powerleveling. Even if you had no visual information at all, players would figure out optimal leveling strategies. Even if the developers tweak things behind the scenes, documentation of XP gained based on time would be trivial to collect and would reveal patterns of variable experience.

    You're suggesting draconian solutions to what I consider to be a non-issue.

    Now you've added immersion into the mix.

    If you want to move on, I'm fine to say we can agree to disagree. Accusing me of misunderstanding when I am explicitly refuting a point you have made two separate times is kind of annoying, though.


    This post was edited by Liav at July 21, 2017 1:37 AM PDT
    • 78 posts
    July 21, 2017 3:03 AM PDT

    Kittik said:

    Angrykiz said:

    Still hoping level 1 takes long enough to make people want to group up and not have the first 10 levels be a solo thing then all of a sudden it's a group game.

    Kiz~

    What fun would grouping be when no one has any abilities with which to do anything?  A healer archtype of no healer, a CC archtype of no CC abilities?  A group of all level 1's would be just a bunch of kick, slash or fireballs.

     

    Why do you want classes to start level 1 without their basic abilities? A level 1 cleric should start with Minor Healing spell and maybe a buff, same for the other archtypes. Each archtype should start with one or two essential abilities.