In Defense of Milestone Leveling

[CleverNickName]

Give them the XP in-session when they do this stuff and they'll feel like their choices matter. And if they end up levelling a session late or early, surely no harm done.

Nah, that won't happen. They will level up when they pass the (invisible) milestone. I need their levels to be predictable, because I won't have time to adjust and re-balance encounters and such before each gaming session. If the levels of the party can vary, it defeats the purpose of using milestones.

 

[CleverNickName]

I would say what makes the difference is whether or not the choice was an informed one. If the players know in advance what exactly gets them XP, then they can prioritize and make decisions based on that, to the extent getting XP is important to them. If they don't know in advance what gets them XP, then yeah, the DM may as well just hand out levels by fiat and dispense with the illusion of choice.

Exactly. I don't necessarily want the players focusing on experience points, I want to provide them with other (and in my opinion, more meaningful) motivators. If I assign XP only for killing monsters, the focus of the game shifts to monster-hunting. Nothing wrong with that; it's certainly a fun way to play D&D...but it's not what I'm going for here. If I assign XP in reliable, predictable ways that the players can formulate and expect, I am in essence guiding their decisions. Again, nothing wrong with that, but it's not what I'm going for either. So I intend to keep them guessing about XP, or if I can manage it, not thinking about it at all.

I would also add that if you're tying XP to making decisions to engage with your DM prep, then the likelihood that your prep isn't "wasted" goes way up. So that is an added benefit. My players, for example, will usually scour an adventure location such that all the XP and loot is found. It's pretty rare when they leave any XP (and thus my prep) on the table.

Yeah, I can see how that would be frustrating. I honestly don't have a problem with stuff like that happening. If the players forget to search a room and miss out on a magic item I had hidden there, or if they miss the secret door that would have lead to the Easy Way Out and ended up having to take the Hard Way instead, that's just organic story development. Part of the fun for me as a DM is reacting to the players' actions, and watching them shape the outcome...I love it when even I don't know what will happen.

But it's one thing to have the plot shift away from the forest and into the swamp. It's another thing to have to re-balance every encounter in the swamp to account for the party being a level lower or higher than I expected. Thus the milestone leveling.

 

[Oofta]

Quick thought experiment. In the “shared story, not advanced board game” - can you imagine a different part of the story wherein the characters need FEWER capabilities? Would they be alright with de-leveling so their capabilities matched the needs of the shared story?

I can’t (and therefore won’t) answer for your players. But I wouldn’t be alright with that if I were playing and you said, “ok, Brad we’re dealing with goblins again this time, so it’s back down to level two.” I suspect I’m not alone there. Advancement is a fairly big part of the game. Getting new abilities, new spells, and new magic gear is part of the appeal. And you see this across platforms and games of all stripes, not just tabletop; leveling is a measure of advancement and XP is a measure of leveling. Gaining XP feels like accomplishing or working towards something.

I’m not knocking story, or any in-game motivations. I’m just saying there are other motivations, advancement being one of them, and there are some ways to handle advancement (engaging and less so) just like there are ways to tell engaging shared stories and duds.

IMO, ignoring XP because it’s too gamey or too meta or too hard risks overlooking it’s value. And, it’s been around SO LONG now that people are accustomed to it, anyway.

In general, stories move forward or maybe sideways but never backwards. However, since you brought it up, I did do a few sessions where the PCs had been effectively "depowered". It was an unusual situation, taking the PCs from a 4E campaign where they had gotten to 30th level but then didn't "ascend" or any of the other things that were supposed to be part of their end story.

Because of cosmological changes (Ragnarok had been averted, the realms of the gods was no longer as "close" and a lot of magic items were destroyed) along with the fact that we had switched over to 5E the PCs were depowered to 20th level. They basically came out of retirement one last time to clean up some loose ends.

So ... yes I can see the PCs going backwards. Will probably never happen again, it was quite unusual circumstances between switching editions and story resulting in a mini-campaign. It was fun, but it's because it worked for my players. I also like [MENTION=6919838]5ekyu[/MENTION]'s idea of flashback session now and then. I may have to try it some time.

As a general rule though, I never tell the players what their PCs are going to do. If they're 10th level and want to go wipe out that goblin bandit camp they ran away from at 1st level, I'd probably just hand-wave it off screen unless there's some kind of twist that would make it an interesting/fun/challenging encounter. But if they're doing that, other things will happen. I let events unfold in what I think is a natural fashion based on their actions. Even when they totally screw up what was supposed to be a long term nemesis and key player in a cataclysm and instead turned her into an ally. Dang players screwing up my rough sketch of what I thought the story arc would be.

Different people play for a lot of different reasons, I don't think my way is "better". Just different.

 

[iserith]

Exactly. I don't necessarily want the players focusing on experience points, I want to provide them with other (and in my opinion, more meaningful) motivators. If I assign XP only for killing monsters, the focus of the game shifts to monster-hunting. Nothing wrong with that; it's certainly a fun way to play D&D...but it's not what I'm going for here. If I assign XP in reliable, predictable ways that the players can formulate and expect, I am in essence guiding their decisions. Again, nothing wrong with that, but it's not what I'm going for either. So I intend to keep them guessing about XP, or if I can manage it, not thinking about it at all.

Personally, I don't think it's worthwhile to concern oneself with how the players make decisions. That's not in the DM's control anyway. But the DM can incentivize particular behaviors that ultimately support the structure, theme, and tone of the campaign. That is the proper consideration for what XP method to choose in my view and, in order to garner the full benefit of the mechanic, the players must be informed as to what things earn them XP so they are more likely to pursue challenges that support the vision of the campaign. If the campaign has a plot, for example, then following the plot earns them XP. Not following the plot does not earn them XP.

Yeah, I can see how that would be frustrating. I honestly don't have a problem with stuff like that happening. If the players forget to search a room and miss out on a magic item I had hidden there, or if they miss the secret door that would have lead to the Easy Way Out and ended up having to take the Hard Way instead, that's just organic story development. Part of the fun for me as a DM is reacting to the players' actions, and watching them shape the outcome...I love it when even I don't know what will happen.

But it's one thing to have the plot shift away from the forest and into the swamp. It's another thing to have to re-balance every encounter in the swamp to account for the party being a level lower or higher than I expected. Thus the milestone leveling.

I don't particularly care about "wasted" prep either, but it's still a benefit of incentivizing via XP engagement with the DM's prep. It makes the DM's prep time more efficient.

As for adjusting encounters, I wouldn't do this at all. As long as I have telegraphed the difficulty of the challenges in the adventuring area, then it's not my problem if the players get in over their head or curtail their own advancement by going after monsters beneath their power level. It's their informed choice to make.

 

[CleverNickName]

Personally, I don't think it's worthwhile to concern oneself with how the players make decisions. That's not in the DM's control anyway. But the DM can incentivize particular behaviors that ultimately support the structure, theme, and tone of the campaign. That is the proper consideration for what XP method to choose in my view and, in order to garner the full benefit of the mechanic, the players must be informed as to what things earn them XP so they are more likely to pursue challenges that support the vision of the campaign. If the campaign has a plot, for example, then following the plot earns them XP. Not following the plot does not earn them XP.

I think we are in complete agreement on character advancement and pacing. The only difference is I would change "XP" to "a level" in those last two sentences.

As others have pointed out, I would have to do this carefully. Tracking experience points is a big motivator for certain players, and until I know how my table is going to react to it, I should try to keep those milestones as invisible as possible. I don't have a problem with the players knowing they will level-up if they escape the dungeon. But if it distracts the players, or makes the dungeon feel grueling and exhausting like an obstacle course, it's better to keep that under my hat.

 

[Satyrn]

Agreed. Like I said, I'd have to be clever about it...spread out the fake XP between gaming sessions, award XP for non-combat stuff and cut back on random encounters, etc. It's not "milestone leveling" if they don't spot the milestones, right?

My table actually does DM Fiat Levelling - the DM tells us to level when he decides we do.

If you're going to do it this way, my best advice is this: Don't lie to your players about it. We can see through lies.

Please, don't trick your players. If you're gonna hand out XP, don't hand or fake XP. If you're gonna level up your players when you think "yeah, it's time," them tell them that's your system. Your players can buy into it and still have fun and actively pursue whatever goals there are in the game. I know, because my table buys into it and still has immense fun and still actively pursues all our goals.

Whatever system you choose to use, please don't disguise it as something else.

 

[CleverNickName]

Please, don't trick your players. If you're gonna hand out XP, don't hand or fake XP. If you're gonna level up your players when you think "yeah, it's time," them tell them that's your system. Your players can buy into it and still have fun and actively pursue whatever goals there are in the game. I know, because my table buys into it and still has endured fun and still actively pursues all our goals.

Whatever system you choose to use, please don't disguise it as something else.

This is good advice.

I was exaggerating; I shouldn't have called them "fake XP." My point was that there is no real way to tell whether the DM is awarding XP or awarding levels unless they tell you. The DM can always award bonus XP, or add or remove random encounters, etc., to "dial in" the number of XP that they need to award. That's all I was getting at.

 

[iserith]

My table actually does DM Fiat Levelling - the DM tells us to level when he decides we do.

If you're going to do it this way, my best advice is this: Don't lie to your players about it. We can see through lies.

Please, don't trick your players. If you're gonna hand out XP, don't hand or fake XP. If you're gonna level up your players when you think "yeah, it's time," them tell them that's your system. Your players can buy into it and still have fun and actively pursue whatever goals there are in the game. I know, because my table buys into it and still has immense fun and still actively pursues all our goals.

Whatever system you choose to use, please don't disguise it as something else.

Agree 100%.

If a level is earned by escaping the dungeon by whatever means, then letting the players know that ahead of time allows them to decide whether the content they come across along the way is worth engaging with or not. The smart play in such a set up, assuming the player is chiefly motivated by character advancement, is to skip all the content he or she can to get out of the dungeon faster. Stealthing through the dungeon, for example, to the extent that is possible rather than fighting everything which takes more session time. Possibly stopping along the way to do something that'll net the characters some loot or Inspiration.

My goal as a player would be to get through that dungeon in about 30 minutes, then spend the next part of the session going for 3rd level.

 

[Satyrn]

This is good advice.

I was exaggerating; I shouldn't have called them "fake XP." My point was that there is no real way to tell whether the DM is awarding XP or awarding levels unless they tell you. The DM can always award bonus XP, or add or remove random encounters, etc., to "dial in" the number of XP that they need to award. That's all I was getting at.

Aye.

Although I gotta say, it's not because of the "fake XP" phrase that I offered my advice. It was the "I'd have to be clever about it" line. I think you could wind up sabotaging your own goal by being too clever.

You can't get your players to buy into milestone levelling if they don't know you're doing milestone levelling.

 

[jayoungr]

Here’s an example. In my games, monsters that are tougher than you are are worth more XP and monsters that are less tough than you are worth significantly less XP. Discoveries are always worth a moderate amount of XP, and helping your allies is always worth a moderate amount of XP. How do you think my players behave? What do they do? What do they try to avoid doing?

Now if I were to just give them levels whenever I felt it was appropriate, I would lose the connection between the behaviors and the rewards. Any rewards would have to come from another source, but there still wouldn’t be a sense of progress toward character development. Can you guess how they behave in this scenario? Maybe. Maybe not.

If I announce that to the group at the end of the adventure, you are suggesting that some players might feel like their choices didn't matter. "You have escaped the dungeon of Black Mountain! Congratulations, you all gain one level." I think I agree: that sounds really stiff and flat.

So if I were to instead award 300XP, the players might feel like their choices mattered a little more.

I think this is one of those issues that varies a lot by table. For example, the factors you list here would be non-issues to my group. All of us write and/or act in addition to gaming, so we're very story-focused. Gaining progress according to "story beats" feels really natural to us. No one would bat an eye or feel cheated if we were told, "Congratulations, you escaped the dungeon! You gain a level." What would feel stiff and flat would be "You escaped the dungeon last session, but that did nothing. Now that you've fought off those random wolves on the way to your next mission, now you gain a level."