Level Advancement and In-Campaign Time

[Oofta]

Why, though? If it matters to the game world then it matters to the game. If I spend my years between adventures becoming a reknowned artist, that matters to the game as much as it matters to the story and the world it takes place in. Imagine the connections I would have forged between nobility, how did I use my art to influence culture? Did I extract huge sums of money for my work? Do I return to the party vast sums of wealth?


Which at its core reads to me like "I'm not going to actually play through whatever you want to do, so just make sure whatever you do has no fundamental impact on anything." Heck, lets run with your example: there's a gang of were-rats, that is: a gang of humanoids with a highly infectious curse running around town. "Cleaning them up" has meaningful impact. Not just that you cleaned them up, but how you cleaned them up. Did you kill them? Was one of them perhaps a long-lost son of someone important? Did you save them and same question?

If the were-rats are worth no XP, and have no fundamental value to the story other than being a minor irritation to the town, why where they there? Because to me it sounds like this thing that wasn't any trouble, and wasn't really causing that much harm, really didn't need to exist in the first place. It sounds to me like your veto power comes into play right when these things would start to matter.



And also: I only got it from your post, not anyone elses.


Lol no. Because I don't run downtime like that. Downtime isn't a little homework exercise everyone just invents for what happened between now and the next problem. I actually run downtime. It's a thing we all do, together, at the table. Maybe we don't all take part in each other's individual activities, but we are all at the table, taking turns, rolling dice, seeing how the outcomes of our "downtime" turn out.

It's not story time. Ya'll can go home and make up whatever stories you want for your characters. Kill Asmodeus if you want, I don't care. But if it didn't happen at the table, it didn't happen in the game, and it sure as heck doesn't affect the world.

The PCs don't cease to exist simply because there is no game session and because I don't feel the need to play a mini-game surrounding down time. In my campaigns PCs can do things that affect the wider world during their downtime if it makes sense for the story. By taking out the wererats, the syndicate potentially lost an ally and the streets of gutter town are safer for the time being. The PC gained some enemies and some allies which very well might play in to the larger story.

As far as the outcome of the confrontation with the wererats, this is something we work out between the player and the DM between sessions. The player suggests a general outline, DM approves or tweaks, player does draft(s) that get reviewed, etc. When it's all done we post something so everyone can read it. If the entire scenario is too critical or important, it doesn't happen off-screen. Or perhaps the next session picks up with the rest of the group rescuing the PC in question because they got in over their heads.

In another scenario a PC wanted to have their wedding done off screen. I wanted it to happen during a session because I thought it would be fun RP for the group and there were some interesting reveals/decision making to do. There were no alternate dimension Nazis interrupting the wedding, no fights, but there were aspects that mattered to the entire group so it didn't happen off-screen.

Ultimately I view XP, GP, magic items as rewards for playing. D&D is not a reality simulator and as much as I try to make the world logical and consistent, I also don't feel the need to reward people's PCs with rewards for things that happen between sessions.

You know my entire post wasn't responding to you​ right?

You know that people can respond to posts not directed directly at them, right?

 

[Oofta]

"From a game mechanic perspective, things that happen between games don't count" is pretty clearly stating that what you do in your downtime doesn't matter to your progression as a character - progression that is mechanically measured and counted by a) xp and b) wealth.

It shoudn't just "happen". While I don't want to play this out long-form any more than you do, I'd certainly sit down with the player for 15 minutes, get some idea of what the player/PC has in mind, and get some dice rolled:
- in general, how successful were you? (did you get all the wererats, or did they beat you back, or did you miss a bunch? This roll will also give an idea of what xp to give, in relative terms)
- in general, how much did it hurt? (a bad roll in this example probably means the PC picked up lycanthropy; a very bad roll might mean the PC died)
- in general, how lucrative was this venture? (a bad roll might mean you lost money or items, a medium or good roll means you came back with some loot)
- in general, how long did it take? (a really bad roll might indicate you haven't finished yet and have to choose between finishing this or field adventuring...or getting the party to help you finish)

But they're not telling you what they do. They're telling you what they're TRYING to do. Small but very significant difference.

A PC says she's using her downtime to go off and kill Asmodeus? Fine. The same series of dice rolls apply as above, but unless you roll about seven 20's in a row on the "how successful were you" line you can start rolling up a new character, 'cause that one's had it.

No. Someone can say "on my off time I tried to defeat the Grozzle's army", at which point you and the player start rolling as above. After that's done, you-as-DM get to assign the xp earned and treasure recovered. Players NEVER do this on their own.

Lanefan

I had a longer response in my other post, but basically I don't want to play a minified version of a D&D session to resolve downtime outcomes. Downtime is story time in my campaigns.

I view XP, GP and magic items as rewards for playing, not for telling a story.

 

[Irda Ranger]

You don't give out any form of advancement when it doesn't involve killing stuff? I'm a little unclear on your answer.

Advancement is 100% milestone-based. If you complete the quest without killing a single monster, that's still completing the quest.

If it doesn't affect anything, why do it?

Why kill goblins? It's not like XP or pretend-gold-pieces are actually worth anything. It's all a game. You're either having fun or you're not.

Well I wasn't asking to play in your game now was I Captain Snippy-Pants? Thanks for taking the line completely out of context from the line right before it. But hey yeah you went there so lets run with it: It IS a pretty jerk move for the DM to say "Okay it's downtime time, you all split up, you all do you own things, none of you get to stick around each other because you all have to do you own things, on your own, alone, by yourself."

Yeah, that's kinda a jerk move. Because ya know, it's the player's call on what their character does, NOT YOURS

Back up and sit your ass down. I came to share something that worked for our group and we are having fun with, and YOU called ME a "jerk ultimatum" because I'm running my game in a way that maybe isn't your first choice. (Much of which is based on your mis-reading my posts too, I'll add. Like how you didn't pick up on the fact that I'm not using XP) Is it a "jerk ultimatum" if I offer to run Blades in the Dark when Sunfinder wants to play Aces & Eights? I'm offering my players the opportunity to have some downtime, or solo quests, in between the group adventures, and they can do anything they want with that.

We're all having fun with it. If you want to ask questions about it or how it works or why it works, feel free. If you want to pass judgment on me and call me a jerk, REDACTED.


Mod Edit: Somebody has forgotten we have language use and civility rules around here. ~Umbran

 

[Sunseeker]

The PCs don't cease to exist simply because there is no game session and because I don't feel the need to play a mini-game surrounding down time. In my campaigns PCs can do things that affect the wider world during their downtime if it makes sense for the story. By taking out the wererats, the syndicate potentially lost an ally and the streets of gutter town are safer for the time being. The PC gained some enemies and some allies which very well might play in to the larger story.

As far as the outcome of the confrontation with the wererats, this is something we work out between the player and the DM between sessions. The player suggests a general outline, DM approves or tweaks, player does draft(s) that get reviewed, etc. When it's all done we post something so everyone can read it. If the entire scenario is too critical or important, it doesn't happen off-screen. Or perhaps the next session picks up with the rest of the group rescuing the PC in question because they got in over their heads.

In another scenario a PC wanted to have their wedding done off screen. I wanted it to happen during a session because I thought it would be fun RP for the group and there were some interesting reveals/decision making to do. There were no alternate dimension Nazis interrupting the wedding, no fights, but there were aspects that mattered to the entire group so it didn't happen off-screen.

Okay, bolded the two lines that I'm trying to get at.

You don't want to play the "downtime minigame" okay, but because you don't want to play the downtime minigame, players are limited in how impactful their downtime can be. (lets keep this in the realm of fighting gangs and not Asmodeus) This is, as far as I can tell, a personal evaluation on your part as the DM as to how "impactful" their actions are, and if that can take place off-screen.

Is there a way that you communicate this to your players beforehand, that players have an idea what sort of "downtime" they can freely write up?

Ultimately I view XP, GP, magic items as rewards for playing. D&D is not a reality simulator and as much as I try to make the world logical and consistent, I also don't feel the need to reward people's PCs with rewards for things that happen between sessions.

Anything I ask my players to do within the game is "playing". That's why I play out downtime with them, much the way Lanefan describes above. A few simple rolls to determine the degree of success or failure. If a player wants to write this up in detail and bring it to me next time, that's fine, because we've already determined how successful it was, how much reward it generated, and how much impact it had I expect that to be reflected in the story they bring me.

Advancement is 100% milestone-based. If you complete the quest without killing a single monster, that's still completing the quest.

You've got a funny way of answering questions.

Do. People. Earn. Milestones. For. Downtime?
-I'm assuming the answer is NO, but I'm still unclear.

Why kill goblins? It's not like XP or pretend-gold-pieces are actually worth anything. It's all a game. You're either having fun or you're not.

That wasn't my point and you darn well know it, but since you clearly don't care I'm not going to go any further.

Back up and sit your ass down. I came to share something that worked for our group and we are having fun with, and YOU called ME a "jerk ultimatum" because I'm running my game in a way that maybe isn't your first choice.

Hold on cowboy, no I didn't, I said:

I guess you could just say "I'm not going to run a split party, so go to town or I'll stop the game." Sure, it's kinda a jerk ultimatum but it's your right as DM to do it.

YOU took the second part of that line and separated it from the first part. I generally consider any time the DM is handing down orders on how things are going to happen to be a "jerk move". I didn't call YOU a jerk, I called that kind of play jerk-y. If you took it personally because you do these kinds of things, perhaps you should evaluate your doing of these things, if you don't like people calling you out on them? Or maybe you just shouldn't publicly admit to these things on a public message board where people can take you to task over them.

 

[Oofta]

Okay, bolded the two lines that I'm trying to get at.

You don't want to play the "downtime minigame" okay, but because you don't want to play the downtime minigame, players are limited in how impactful their downtime can be. (lets keep this in the realm of fighting gangs and not Asmodeus) This is, as far as I can tell, a personal evaluation on your part as the DM as to how "impactful" their actions are, and if that can take place off-screen.

Is there a way that you communicate this to your players beforehand, that players have an idea what sort of "downtime" they can freely write up?


Anything I ask my players to do within the game is "playing". That's why I play out downtime with them, much the way Lanefan describes above. A few simple rolls to determine the degree of success or failure. If a player wants to write this up in detail and bring it to me next time, that's fine, because we've already determined how successful it was, how much reward it generated, and how much impact it had I expect that to be reflected in the story they bring me.


You've got a funny way of answering questions.

Do. People. Earn. Milestones. For. Downtime?
-I'm assuming the answer is NO, but I'm still unclear.


That wasn't my point and you darn well know it, but since you clearly don't care I'm not going to go any further.

I'm just relaying what I and my group have done and enjoyed for several years now (I'm not always the DM). Some people are motivated by adding to their character's journey and don't need direct PC rewards, the story is it's own reward. In addition my campaigns are fairly open-ended and sometimes there are threads that one person would like to pursue that the rest of the group is not interested in, or not interested in enough to spend game time on.

Let's say Bob has a PC Vinzu. Vinzu grew up in the bad part of the city called Gutter Town. At lower levels the group had encountered a wererat gang in Gutter Town but more pressing issues all came up that they decided to pursue. Vinzu isn't particularly happy about this but understands. There's a chance of a portal to a hell dimension opening and if it does the entire region will face dire consequences. Derek the mage has already declared he's going to need to do several months of study and research, Brog the Barbarian wants to spend some time with his brother he thought was dead and so on.

So that's where the session ends. The group voted and they decided they're going to investigate the portal next session so I can prep. A couple of the PCs have downtime activities unrelated to adventuring but Bob thinks Vinzu would want to clean out the wererats. If Sheena (who has not declared downtime actions) wants to join Vinzu, great she's more than welcome. So Bob proposes the story arc and as DM I agree that it's fairly trivial and let them handle it in downtime.

If I had the time and inclination I could run a side-quest, but we don't so instead we handle it off-line with a story. Maybe Bob works with Mary for Sheena's point of view or they both write the story from different perspectives. Their reward is that they get to do some creative writing that hopefully they and the rest of the group enjoy.

So no. No milestones, no concrete rewards. Perhaps because of this Vinzu sets himself up as head of the local gang to fill in the power vacuum, or whatever outcome makes sense. Or maybe I had a note that the wererat gang was really a front for a Beholder and the next session becomes the rest of the group rescuing Vinzu with Bob running an NPC. With Bob's permission of course. At the same time other people may write their own stories. Derek's player may write up a diary about their findings, Brog's player may write a letter to the group telling him about visiting family. Sheena's really been doing a long-term secret side story she worked out with the DM that spans multiple down-time sessions but she's not ready to tell the group about it yet.

I do make occasional exceptions for magic items. It may make sense for Vinzu to get that cloak of invisibility that I was going to give him at some point soon anyway. In addition, campaigns can pivot based in part on downtime activities although in most cases I want the entire group involved.

TLDR: sometimes the story is a reward in and of itself. I've enjoyed it over the years without the PC gaining anything from it other than a fun story. That's enough.

 

[Lanefan]

I had a longer response in my other post, but basically I don't want to play a minified version of a D&D session to resolve downtime outcomes. Downtime is story time in my campaigns.

But...er...you still have to resolve the outcomes somehow, don't you, of what the PCs (try to) do?

And the options for this are:
- play it out long-form (which I don't think any of us want to do)
- mini-dungeon it (which is what I do)
- handwave it but still give xp etc. for it
- ignore it and-or say it doesn't count (which blows up both mechanical consistency and internal game-world consistency)

I view XP, GP and magic items as rewards for playing, not for telling a story.

I view all three as potential character rewards for what the character does. I don't at all see them as player rewards, even though it's the player who in real life gets to enjoy receiving them when earned.

 

[Lanefan]

I'm just relaying what I and my group have done and enjoyed for several years now (I'm not always the DM). Some people are motivated by adding to their character's journey and don't need direct PC rewards, the story is it's own reward. In addition my campaigns are fairly open-ended and sometimes there are threads that one person would like to pursue that the rest of the group is not interested in, or not interested in enough to spend game time on.

Open-ended campaigns = great!

Let's say Bob has a PC Vinzu. Vinzu grew up in the bad part of the city called Gutter Town. At lower levels the group had encountered a wererat gang in Gutter Town but more pressing issues all came up that they decided to pursue. Vinzu isn't particularly happy about this but understands. There's a chance of a portal to a hell dimension opening and if it does the entire region will face dire consequences. Derek the mage has already declared he's going to need to do several months of study and research, Brog the Barbarian wants to spend some time with his brother he thought was dead and so on.

So that's where the session ends. The group voted and they decided they're going to investigate the portal next session so I can prep. A couple of the PCs have downtime activities unrelated to adventuring but Bob thinks Vinzu would want to clean out the wererats. If Sheena (who has not declared downtime actions) wants to join Vinzu, great she's more than welcome. So Bob proposes the story arc and as DM I agree that it's fairly trivial and let them handle it in downtime.

I'm on board up to here, except I'd want to be involved in the "let them handle it" part.

If I had the time and inclination I could run a side-quest, but we don't so instead we handle it off-line with a story. Maybe Bob works with Mary for Sheena's point of view or they both write the story from different perspectives. Their reward is that they get to do some creative writing that hopefully they and the rest of the group enjoy.

So no. No milestones, no concrete rewards.

But here you've lost mechanical consistency within the game, in that if knocking off the wererats would earn xp if played out long-form it would in theory also earn xp if played out short-form or handwaved...right?

Also, where's the risk? Where's the possibility that things perhaps don't go the way either Vinzu or Bob has in mind? (which again would certainly exist were this played out long-form)

Perhaps because of this Vinzu sets himself up as head of the local gang to fill in the power vacuum, or whatever outcome makes sense. Or maybe I had a note that the wererat gang was really a front for a Beholder and the next session becomes the rest of the group rescuing Vinzu with Bob running an NPC. With Bob's permission of course.

With Bob's permission?

If Bob wants to put Vinzu into a situation that might go wrong for him then Bob has to be ready to accept the consequences, good (most likely) or bad (it happens sometimes).

At the same time other people may write their own stories. Derek's player may write up a diary about their findings, Brog's player may write a letter to the group telling him about visiting family. Sheena's really been doing a long-term secret side story she worked out with the DM that spans multiple down-time sessions but she's not ready to tell the group about it yet.

These are different, in that neither Brog's nor Derek's actions involve any significant potential risk or any significant potential reward.

Sheena's stuff, on the other hand, might (depending what she's working on) - and at that point it needs some sort of DM-player interaction and resolution.

I do make occasional exceptions for magic items. It may make sense for Vinzu to get that cloak of invisibility that I was going to give him at some point soon anyway.

So, reward without risk.

In addition, campaigns can pivot based in part on downtime activities although in most cases I want the entire group involved.

On this bit I agree. Sometimes the downtime activities of one character end up pulling the whole party into something.

TLDR: sometimes the story is a reward in and of itself. I've enjoyed it over the years without the PC gaining anything from it other than a fun story. That's enough.

I ge tthis, but I just can't get past the mechanical and narrative inconsistencies it presents.

Lanefan

 

[Oofta]

Open-ended campaigns = great!

I'm on board up to here, except I'd want to be involved in the "let them handle it" part.

But here you've lost mechanical consistency within the game, in that if knocking off the wererats would earn xp if played out long-form it would in theory also earn xp if played out short-form or handwaved...right?

Also, where's the risk? Where's the possibility that things perhaps don't go the way either Vinzu or Bob has in mind? (which again would certainly exist were this played out long-form)

With Bob's permission?

If Bob wants to put Vinzu into a situation that might go wrong for him then Bob has to be ready to accept the consequences, good (most likely) or bad (it happens sometimes).

These are different, in that neither Brog's nor Derek's actions involve any significant potential risk or any significant potential reward.

Sheena's stuff, on the other hand, might (depending what she's working on) - and at that point it needs some sort of DM-player interaction and resolution.

So, reward without risk.

On this bit I agree. Sometimes the downtime activities of one character end up pulling the whole party into something.

I ge tthis, but I just can't get past the mechanical and narrative inconsistencies it presents.

Lanefan

I've just relayed the way we run it, and the what we've enjoyed over the years. Not saying it's going to work for you. Different strokes for different folks and all.


But to address the main issues.

1) There is no real risk in any side story. If there were real risk, real chance of failure, it wouldn't be a side story. If the party's 2nd level and Vinzu wants to take on the wererat gang single-handedly I'd veto the idea and suggest an alternative story. Maybe a short story about the impact the gang is having on people he grew up with, or an old childhood friend that has joined the gang. If Vinzu is a 15th level rogue, he can probably take out the entire gang without help.


Therefore, no risk, no die rolling, no XP (or achievement of milestone). The PCs don't have any conception of experience points, it's a game construct. There's no "narrative inconsistency" from the PC's perspective. From the PC's perspective as time goes by they practice their sword-fighting techniques or trying to understand spells better and slowly they get better. Occasionally they make a breakthrough after a particularly challenging period in their life, other times they do not.


2) With Bob's permission means that Bob's PC is in grave danger for out-of-game activity. An alternative story is that he finds out that there's beholder running the gang and he runs like hell. i guess I could have a roll of the die or two to resolve this particular point, but that would be the exception of how I handle it.

3) If I hand out a magic item it's because it makes sense from the story's perspective. Let's say Vinzu is a paladin and I've decided that it's time to give him a holy avenger but I have a cool scene in mind, an experience that will have a lot of impact for Bob. But it's not going to make a lot of sense or be particularly engaging for the rest of the group. I may handle it as a side-story and if Bob wants to write up a story about what it means to him, great. Otherwise I'll just write up something short and post it so the group knows it happened.

4) So I don't see any inconsistencies. Leveling isn't a reward for killing monsters, it's a reflection of PC growth. Because it's a game, that growth is generally related to killing monsters but it doesn't have to be.

 

[Irda Ranger]

I’ll weigh in on the were-rats and say how I’d handle it. I have a similar situation in my own campaign now.

The situation in my campaign is that in the adventure just completed the PCs learned there’s a certain nobleman who’s a pretender and has murdered and replaced the true nobleman. So the PCs went to a fortune teller to get some clues as to how to take this guy on (who is very politically powerful).

The fortune teller told them that the pretender is holding a secret prisoner who’s critical to the pretender’s plan, and finding the prisoner will help beat the pretender and avenge the murder. The only clue they have as to where the prisoner is secretly held is a city. A big city.

So downtime. One PC is going to that city to look for clues as to where the prisoner is. He doesn’t have much to go on. So we are going to use the upkeep rules in the PHB and roll once per month to find a clue.

But once he figures out where the prisoner is, he will send for the other PCs and that’s the next adventure.

You could do something similar with the wererats. Spend several months gathering intel. Learn where their secret base is. Get a clue as to who their agents are in the City. Then send for the other PCs and that’s an adventure for the whole group.

 

[pming]

Hiya!

One year of weekly, 7-hour play, should get PC's to 9th. After that, 2 levels per year. That has worked for me for decades and seems to be the "sweet spot". All these alternative "milestone" or "chapter based" level advancement just sucks the "D&D'ism" out of D&D, imnsho. Gaining XP and levels is a large feel of the whole class-based system. Taking it out is, to me, the equivilent of removing both Dragons as opponents and Dungeons as locations.

Just hand out less XP and STOP USING AP'S. I've come to believe that the whole "Adventure Path" style adventures presented by Paizo when they were doing Dungeon mag was one of the WORST things to hit "D&D". It, with the help of 3e (you're not getting out of this one, 3.x!), has raised/trained/resulted in this mentality that if you aren't gaining levels ever few sessions then you are not having fun. "It's been 6 sessions and we haven't gained a level! This isn't fun! Our DM is a stinky-meany-poo-poo head!".

A lot of Players now feel they deserve to get to level 20 in short order. How can they not? I don't blame them, really...I blame AP's. This is a problem for any DM who wants to present a reasonably believable campaign world. The easiest was is, as I said, hand out one quarter to one half of the XP listed for monsters and full for GP. You may have to fiddle with the GP thing if you run "3.x/5e" adventures, however, as they likely hand out too much (?). You can get large hauls from 1e/earlier adventure modules, to be sure, but 1e was much more deadly.

Now, IF I was to try and use a non-xp means of level advancement... I'd have it be based on hours of play and a PC would need their next level, squared, as hours playing that PC (maybe put in an upper level; say 50 per level after 7th). To get to second level, 4 hours. To get to third, 9. To get to 4th, 16. A player would only need to keep track of the total hours playing that character. So Xp doesn't matter, how much gold you get doesn't matter, only playing the same character. The longer you keep that character alive, the higher level they get. If you play an average of 5 hours a week, you're looking at YEARS to get a PC to 20th level. This would suit me fine. The first three levels would go by quickly, but then slow down at 5, 6, 7 and onward needing about two and a half months of 5-hour sessions per level after 7th; so...between two and a half to three years to hit 20th. I could live with that.

^_^

Paul L. Ming