D&D 5E No One Plays High Level?

[EzekielRaiden]

I can’t be bothered to use XP, it is milestone leveling. But if I used XP, of course there would be XP gained from stuff other than combat as that’s at least half the game.

Ah. Perhaps that explains it then; the DM ensuring that the levels happen at the desired pace. Haven't had any 5e DMs interested in milestone levelling. I do know one person who runs her games that way though, so it isn't totally unknown to me. I just don't recall ever seeing it in the online gaming space.

But yes, despite these things being at least half the game, I've gotten far more non-combat XP from 4e than I have from 5e despite having joined far more 5e games than 4e ones at this point.

It's part of why I am so puzzled/frustrated by all the talk of having non-combat encounters out the wazoo. If they actually gave XP that might be a different story, but unless the thing we did specifically was averting a combat encounter through RP or resource/skill use, I've never seen anyone give out XP for anything but combat in 5e. That pattern will technically break if the on-again, off-again game I mentioned keeps on its pace, as the DM has said he will be making special dispensation to get us to a higher level ASAP in order to align with his regular group. That it is a special dispensation, however, is very clear.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Ah. Perhaps that explains it then; the DM ensuring that the levels happen at the desired pace. Haven't had any 5e DMs interested in milestone levelling. I do know one person who runs her games that way though, so it isn't totally unknown to me. I just don't recall ever seeing it in the online gaming space.

But yes, despite these things being at least half the game, I've gotten far more non-combat XP from 4e than I have from 5e despite having joined far more 5e games than 4e ones at this point.

It's part of why I am so puzzled/frustrated by all the talk of having non-combat encounters out the wazoo. If they actually gave XP that might be a different story, but unless the thing we did specifically was averting a combat encounter through RP or resource/skill use, I've never seen anyone give out XP for anything but combat in 5e. That pattern will technically break if the on-again, off-again game I mentioned keeps on its pace, as the DM has said he will be making special dispensation to get us to a higher level ASAP in order to align with his regular group. That it is a special dispensation, however, is very clear.

Unfortunate but seems peculiar to me. Advice on DMG on experience is a bit vague, but you’re definitely supposed to give XP for non-combat stuff and I don’t recall it working any differently in 4e.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Unfortunate but seems peculiar to me. Advice on DMG on experience is a bit vague, but you’re definitely supposed to give XP for non-combat stuff and I don’t recall it working any differently in 4e.

Well, the big difference is that Skill Challenges are actually a thing, with definite XP rewards for completing them, alongside the explicit instructions about "quest" XP, both for general party stuff and personal, player-driven "quests." I've read the relevant section of the 5e DMG, though I admit it's been a hot minute. From memory, though, I would have called "vague"...generous, shall we say. But I feel the same way about almost everything the 5e DMG "advises"--a topic for a different thread. (Edit: Having reread it, yeah, "vague" is generous. It says you can do so, maybe, if you feel like it, and gives barely-there "advice" that effectively boils down to "pretend it's a combat, guess at the difficulty, and then award equivalent XP." It provides no actual tools or processes for drawing any such conclusions. "Session-based advancement" does give a clear, numerical guideline, though "Story-based advancement" gets literally a single sentence that...says that's a thing you can do. Pretty typical of 5e DMG "advice.")

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Well, the big difference is that Skill Challenges are actually a thing, with definite XP rewards for completing them, alongside the explicit instructions about "quest" XP, both for general party stuff and personal, player-driven "quests." I've read the relevant section of the 5e DMG, though I admit it's been a hot minute. From memory, though, I would have called "vague"...generous, shall we say. But I feel the same way about almost everything the 5e DMG "advises"--a topic for a different thread. (Edit: Having reread it, yeah, "vague" is generous. It says you can do so, maybe, if you feel like it, and gives barely-there "advice" that effectively boils down to "pretend it's a combat, guess at the difficulty, and then award equivalent XP." It provides no actual tools or processes for drawing any such conclusions. "Session-based advancement" does give a clear, numerical guideline, though "Story-based advancement" gets literally a single sentence that...says that's a thing you can do. Pretty typical of 5e DMG "advice.")

I see, might be the issue then. DMG is generally pretty terrible, easily the weakest aspect of 5e, but more experienced GMs like me barely notice it as we just import our established practices from earlier editions and other games. But an official book has no business being that bad at teaching newbies how to run the game, especially as this is a game which relies on GM a lot to work properly.

 

[FrozenNorth]

That would be quite reasonable. And about twice as fast as any 5e game I've played. Admittedly, many games I managed to join didn't make it to third level, so I can't be sure the pattern would hold. What took you two and a half months would have taken these games around five and a half. Maybe four for the ones that only spent three sessions at level 1.

Out of curiosity, how did you get enough XP to level in one session? 300 is quite a lot to gain purely from combat. I assume this means you got some from non-combat stuff? If so, that would be another thing I hear claimed as commonly used, but which I have never actually seen in person.

Not the OP, but I just started a new campaign with my kids, and they levelled up at the end of the 1st session with 400 XP each.

I always award XP for non-combat encounters, and the XP awarded is commensurate with a combat encounter.

The party had 3 combat encounters (which averaged to about level 1). The rest of the XP was from non-combat encounters.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Unfortunate but seems peculiar to me. Advice on DMG on experience is a bit vague, but you’re definitely supposed to give XP for non-combat stuff and I don’t recall it working any differently in 4e.

That is the way I run 5e too, but I was shocked when I played Pathfinder 2 and non-combat encounters grant a quarter of the XP of combat encounters.

I think it must be a habit from 3e that DMs have unthinkingly carried over.

 

[Reynard]

How in the world do you spend multiple sessions at level 1? You only need 300 xp to get to 2. You can get that fighting off angry squirrels.

 

[Oofta]

How in the world do you spend multiple sessions at level 1? You only need 300 xp to get to 2. You can get that fighting off angry squirrels.

Fighting angry squirrels at level 1? Do you want to kill off all the PCs that quick?

 

[EzekielRaiden]

How in the world do you spend multiple sessions at level 1? You only need 300 xp to get to 2. You can get that fighting off angry squirrels.

I have tried to find an encounter which actually awards 300 XP per character for a four-person, first-level party. Anything that awards even 100 per person is instantly Deadly, and 300 per person (thus 1200 XP) is orders of magnitude beyond Deadly.

Three Deadly encounters in a single session sounds like a nightmare, especially given how fragile first-level characters are.

Just to be clear: You are actually splitting the XP reward from any given monster between the characters, right? Characters do not earn 400 XP each for defeating a CR1 creature. They earn (400/# of characters) XP.

 

[Cordwainer Fish]

Fighting angry squirrels at level 1? Do you want to kill off all the PCs that quick?
View attachment 329599

Could be worse.