D&D 5E Relative Difficulties of Advancing in 5e

OptionalRule

Adventurer
I wrote a bit about the difficulties of leveling at different points along a characters lifetime in 5e. Not earth shattering but I was surprised to see that 11-19 was about HALF as hard to level as 10th level and this made me reconsider pacing in experience based games, or even expectations on pacing for milestone based games.

5e Advancement Difficulties
 

log in or register to remove this ad


OptionalRule

Adventurer
The XP chart in 5e makes no sense whatsoever.
Sure, one of the reasons I was like "What does this even mean?". I tired to stay away from a value judgement on it. I personally would have expected a regularly increasing difficulty. I guess by level 11 they're just like "Okay, lets get this over with"
 

pukunui

Legend
The designers, Mike Mearls in particular, talked about the XP leveling chart quite a bit in the early days of the game.

The idea is that the first few levels go by quickly, then things slow down through the middle of the game so you have more time to enjoy that "sweet spot", then it speeds up again at the point where the game generally starts to bog down (past level 10) so as to keep people engaged.
 

delericho

Legend
One of the topics I wished they'd addressed in the DMG was the number of encounters required to level up by level (breaking down and explaining the chart linked from the OP). From there, they could easily have gone into a discussion about how to easily speed up/slow down advancement to suit the individual group. Even just stating why some levels need more encounters to advance than others would have helped.
 

Stormonu

Legend
A couple of things to point out:

By D&D's surveys, most campaigns last 6 mos. to a year, ending between 9th-12th level.

Most of D&D's monsters are CR 9 or lower.

When you start getting into the higher levels, it's less likely you will be facing same-CR monsters and more likely you will be facing multiples of lower level opponents, save for the occasional sub-boss or boss. If you go by the encounter building guidelines, with its multiplier for # of creatures, when you actually add the XP up, it will be lower than par-CR opponents, thus slowing your advancement.

So the 1.6 you have for par-CR opponents might be more like 2.0 to 2.5 when you look at the likelyhood that the party is facing "lesser" but more numerous opponents at higher levels.
 


R_J_K75

Legend
The idea is that the first few levels go by quickly, then things slow down through the middle of the game so you have more time to enjoy that "sweet spot", then it speeds up again at the point where the game generally starts to bog down (past level 10) so as to keep people engaged.
If they recognize that the game bogs down after a certain point why not just design that part out of the game? Here's an idea, just get rid of levels 11-20 or make them fun and worth playing. I'd be all for a restructuring of the level and advancement system in future editions of the game. One where there are fewer levels but more options per level, and a balanced progression would be fine with me. As it is now in 5E isn't just about every other level one where you get nothing?
 

OptionalRule

Adventurer
One of the topics I wished they'd addressed in the DMG was the number of encounters required to level up by level (breaking down and explaining the chart linked from the OP). From there, they could easily have gone into a discussion about how to easily speed up/slow down advancement to suit the individual group. Even just stating why some levels need more encounters to advance than others would have helped.
I found that either difficult or not helpful for 2 main reasons:
1. If you look at official modules, it's pretty common to face a higher CR creature. Recently MUCH more common, so how do you pick a mid-point.
2. With the difficulty multiplier of multiple foes, it gets really fuzzy.

This is why I backed off exact numbers and out to "what are they trying to tell me here."
 


Remove ads

Top