Legends & Lore: Experience Points and Levels

[Jan van Leyden]

In the new arcticle M. Mearls discusses a topic which seems rather old for us at ENWorld.

 

[MerricB]

Explicitly acknowledging that story designs just need signposts saying "You are now level 5" is a big step forward.

 

[Ichneumon]

Good to see a long standing method of level advancement get some recognition.

 

[Blackwarder]

I just hope we will get some recognition about how XP and advancement methods effect play style and different methods of gaining XP.

Warder

 

[Lokiare]

You could solve all the problems in this article by simply shifting the xp from monsters, back to goal oriented quests.

Then those that like tallying xp can have a bunch of minor goals like defeat 12 orcs, rescue the princess from the goblins, or get the McGuffin before the bandit king. At the end of which everyone is awarded xp.

Then those that want to level up based on certain milestones can just award a levels worth of xp at those milestones.

(Please note, that was a solution and therefore this is constructive criticism for those that think I never do it right).

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I read the article last night before bed. I read it again this morning. I just read it again before posting... I don't get it.

did it say anything at all other then "Hey some people do X and some people do Y... and we tried both"

I mean nothing saying they were supporting one way or the other, or anything really. It seemed like pure filler

 

[Thyrwyn]

Mearls said it best: "I always like a rule change that mimics what a lot of DMs and players are already doing at the table."

Me, too. It's good to know that many XP options will be presented and that the game will work to accommodate a broad range of play styles.

 

[1of3]

I mean nothing saying they were supporting one way or the other, or anything really. It seemed like pure filler

Wasn't that the case since public playtest finished?

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Wasn't that the case since public playtest finished?

no this one felt worse then the others. I mean he didn't even say "We are looking to do X to support Y" this time

 

[DEFCON 1]

I read the article last night before bed. I read it again this morning. I just read it again before posting... I don't get it.

did it say anything at all other then "Hey some people do X and some people do Y... and we tried both"

I mean nothing saying they were supporting one way or the other, or anything really. It seemed like pure filler

Mike said at the very bottom that rather than having adventure designers force the issue of having to include a "correct" number of encounters to get to character level up via straight XP... it's better to allow the designers to include both options-- monster XP and story-based advancement.

Did he outright say "We're going to force every adventure we write to have both methods represented in it"? No. But did he suggest that both methods can be represented as per what makes most sense to the adventure writer? Yes. Ipso facto... depending on the adventure (especially for Adventure Path modules as he called them out specifically), we will see both methods show up.