D&D 5E Hot to handle level progression in Princes of the Apocalypse (or sandbox adventures in general)

Hi,

as I'm actually reading through the recently released Princes of the Apocalypse Adventure Path there is one thing which gives me headache: Level Progression. I really like the idea, that the player's are free in their choice what to do and in which order, but it seems that the dungeons are written for specific Character levels.
So, what if my player's are not going to the dungeon intended for level 3 but for the dungeon intended for level 6?
Just let them go in, running into the first encounter and realizing that this is way to hard? Seems like a good option. They still have multiple possibilities, as I'm thinking that due to bounded accuracy a 3rd level party could also go into a 4th level Dungeon...

Additionally, should I use the milestone system or XP System? The XP systems seems attractive, because if, for example, the 3rd level PCs go into a 4th level dungeon, they will level faster.

So... What do you think? Do some of you have ideas on how to handle level progression in this Campaign?

best regards

P.S.: I think I will start the campaign at first level and do a little bit of side quests in Red Larch first. I think this sets the stage for the upcoming evil much better than directly delving into the dungeons ;-)
However I'm not sure how to combine this with the suggested Hooks, as I imagine my player's directly following this hooks. Maybe not using the hooks, but instead require some of the player's to have a faction relationship?

I've got a file in the download section with some ideas. I'll be adding to it as I go.



http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?434896-Integrating-LMoP-with-PotA

plancktum said:

So, what if my player's are not going to the dungeon intended for level 3 but for the dungeon intended for level 6?
Just let them go in, running into the first encounter and realizing that this is way to hard? Seems like a good option.

Click to expand...

Yes, I think a defining feature of a sandbox is the idea that the challenges don't adapt to a PC group's level.

Thus it must be possible for the party to stumble upon encounters or locales with different challenge levels.

I see 2 general approaches of handling varying difficulty: to give a clue, or to let the encounter/locale speaks for itself.

If you go clue-based, you can either do that narratively or metagame. The idea is anyway to let the players know when they can still choose to avoid the encounter, or (in case of surprise) latest at the beginning of the encounter. This way it is most of the times up to them, except in those cases when the encounter would be inevitable.

If you go clueless, the players are supposed to notice as the encounter progresses. It is obviously more risky, because it will be too late much more frequently than in the previous case.

So to summarize, you might see three options for the DM:

- clue-based, narrative: "You are suddenly attacked by a gazebo! It looks ravenous and powerful, as it effortlessly rips through a couple of trees to reach you."
- clue-based, metagaming: "You are suddenly attacked by a gazebo! It's a "hard" encounter for your current level".
- clueless: "You are suddenly attacked by a gazebo!" then a couple of rounds later everyone is down to 30% their HP.

Independently on that, you can condition the clues to PC's skills checks, e.g. let the Wizard roll an Int(Arcana) check on gazebos knowledge to decide if the party gets the clue or not.

And this can be applied to individual encounters or entire locales, such as a dungeon, a forest, a swamp, etc... Personally I like sandboxes where locales have roughly homogeneous encounters (think for example World of Warcraft); I think it makes good sense narratively and it helps the flow of adventures.

plancktum said:

Additionally, should I use the milestone system or XP System? The XP systems seems attractive, because if, for example, the 3rd level PCs go into a 4th level dungeon, they will level faster.

Click to expand...

I agree, because in the sandbox the party is able to choose where to go next, so if they can choose between an easy challenge or a hard challenge, then the rewards should be somewhat proportionate with the risks.

Although, I do not recommend to base all XPs on combat encounters. In fact I usually look forward roughly 50%-50% gained XP between combat and non-combat. Thus I would definitely also grant XPs for completing quests, and in my opinion one of the best feature of typical sandboxes is to have multiple major/minor quests active at the same time.

The problem (for me) with a sandbox that doesn't adapt to the party level is that it becomes as much a railroad as the adventures that they proponents claim to hate, it's just that the party have to self-railroad or die horribly.

The whole choice thing becomes a thinly veiled fiction, the characters may become aware of things that they can't handle but they still have to wait until they can handle it before they can engage with it and hope that they don't attract the attention of a big bad too early.

Kaychsea said:

The problem (for me) with a sandbox that doesn't adapt to the party level is that it becomes as much a railroad as the adventures that they proponents claim to hate, it's just that the party have to self-railroad or die horribly.

The whole choice thing becomes a thinly veiled fiction, the characters may become aware of things that they can't handle but they still have to wait until they can handle it before they can engage with it and hope that they don't attract the attention of a big bad too early.

Click to expand...

That's not really my experience. The nice thing about a sandbox is that if a party gets manhandled by a stronger enemy, they have a lot of choices. Sure, they might just leave that part of the box for later, after they've leveled up. OR, they can get really pissed off and dedicate their next several sessions to getting revenge: researching the monster and its weaknesses and/or recruiting a bunch of mercenary hirelings to join their next expedition and/or buying, making, or searching for newer, better equipment, and/or devising elaborate schemes to give themselves the advantage when next they and that monster meet.

The key thing about the sandbox is that it's the players' choice. There's no wrong answer.

plancktum said:

Hi,

as I'm actually reading through the recently released Princes of the Apocalypse Adventure Path there is one thing which gives me headache: Level Progression. I really like the idea, that the player's are free in their choice what to do and in which order, but it seems that the dungeons are written for specific Character levels.
So, what if my player's are not going to the dungeon intended for level 3 but for the dungeon intended for level 6?
Just let them go in, running into the first encounter and realizing that this is way to hard? Seems like a good option. They still have multiple possibilities, as I'm thinking that due to bounded accuracy a 3rd level party could also go into a 4th level Dungeon...

Click to expand...

I think a good policy as DM is to be generous with information. Telegraph the threats of a situation well before the PCs are over their heads. Show the badassness of the monsters from afar or by way of clues they've left behind. Not only is this good storytelling in the form of foreshadowing and tension-building, it gives the players a cue to investigate and evaluate the level of threat and determine a good approach.

plancktum said:

Additionally, should I use the milestone system or XP System? The XP systems seems attractive, because if, for example, the 3rd level PCs go into a 4th level dungeon, they will level faster.

So... What do you think? Do some of you have ideas on how to handle level progression in this Campaign?

Click to expand...

I'd ask my players to decide how we will handle it. Generally though, I would go with milestones if there is an overarching plot to follow because you'll want to incentivize following the plot. If there is no set plot, then standard XP.

plancktum said:

P.S.: I think I will start the campaign at first level and do a little bit of side quests in Red Larch first. I think this sets the stage for the upcoming evil much better than directly delving into the dungeons ;-)
However I'm not sure how to combine this with the suggested Hooks, as I imagine my player's directly following this hooks. Maybe not using the hooks, but instead require some of the player's to have a faction relationship?

Click to expand...

Before the game kicks off, make a list of elements that will make an appearance in the plot (locations, NPCs, items, happenings, etc.) and ask each player in turn to establish a connection between their character and that element (or more than one element, if you like). This creates useful context later by giving a player a reason to engage with said elements. Be sure to establish bonds between the player characters as well, while you're at it. Everything will go much, much smoother in game play if you do these things.

plancktum said:

So, what if my player's are not going to the dungeon intended for level 3 but for the dungeon intended for level 6?
Just let them go in, running into the first encounter and realizing that this is way to hard?

Click to expand...

Yes! PCs who walk into a dungeon without knowing anything about it deserve, well, you know.

plancktum said:

Additionally, should I use the milestone system or XP System? The XP systems seems attractive, because if, for example, the 3rd level PCs go into a 4th level dungeon, they will level faster.

Click to expand...

If you're going to let PCs take on encounters that are much higher or much lower than their levels, you'd better reward them accordingly. You don't need to use the XP system for this, but that's a fair way to go as long as you do the requisite accounting.

One alternative is to change the difficulty of areas over time. For example, you could tone down some of the more difficult areas in PotA by reducing the number of enemies, or reducing the hit points/AC/damage of individual enemies. This is easily explained as the cults getting stronger over time.

Iosue said:

That's not really my experience. The nice thing about a sandbox is that if a party gets manhandled by a stronger enemy, they have a lot of choices. Sure, they might just leave that part of the box for later, after they've leveled up. OR, they can get really pissed off and dedicate their next several sessions to getting revenge: researching the monster and its weaknesses and/or recruiting a bunch of mercenary hirelings to join their next expedition and/or buying, making, or searching for newer, better equipment, and/or devising elaborate schemes to give themselves the advantage when next they and that monster meet.

The key thing about the sandbox is that it's the players' choice. There's no wrong answer.

Click to expand...

Yeah I've seen that attitude from my players quite a few times, and sometimes it works and I just say to myself "didn't see them beating that" and give out XP and they are so happy to have overcome that challange. Then they sometimes get overconfident and....wham!

Kaychsea said:

The problem (for me) with a sandbox that doesn't adapt to the party level is that it becomes as much a railroad as the adventures that they proponents claim to hate, it's just that the party have to self-railroad or die horribly.

The whole choice thing becomes a thinly veiled fiction, the characters may become aware of things that they can't handle but they still have to wait until they can handle it before they can engage with it and hope that they don't attract the attention of a big bad too early.

Click to expand...

Sure. But, the DM can adapt even status quo encounters to the party. For instance, if an encounter is far above the PC's level, the opponents might be cocky, and not all attack the PCs initially, maybe the biggest ogre steps up while the others take bets and heckle. In the opposite extreme, the much more powerful party might create such a stir upon entering an area that some of the potential enemies get wind of it and band together for protection from the threat. Same monsters run differently in reaction to the party's status in the world as they're aware of it.

(Of course a low-level party could cause a stir if they were puffed up for some reason, and a high-level one could teleport or sneak into the area under magical disguises.)

The players can also react differently. They might try to bypass the Ogre encounter, or trick or placate the dim-witted brutes if they don't feel confident of winning a battle.