20 levels in 3 months? NOT THIS TIME!

[Darkness]

In my current tabletop game I've been using 1 real month = 1 game month, approx.

Heh. I once used 1 real day = 1 game year.

Of course, that was for a Vampire game with a starting date of several hundred years BC.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I honestly think I should have stretched out the timeline better for War of the Burning Sky. As written, the war takes about a year. I think I should have put in more buffer nations that could fall to the enemies while the PCs took down-time, and to force the PCs to cover more distance.

I think the timeline of the war was believable. What was less believable was the 'inherent to D&D' problem of people being able to ever go from common people to demi-gods.

[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Magician-Apprentice-Riftwar-Raymond-Feist/dp/0553564943/ref=pd_bbs_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1234415167&sr=8-4"]Dont[/ame] [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Wheel-Time-Boxed-Set/dp/0812538366/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1234415224&sr=1-1"]read[/ame] [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Belgariad-Vol-Books-1-3-Magicians/dp/0345456327/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1234415253&sr=1-1"]much?[/ame]

 

[RangerWickett]

Dont read much?

I've actually never read any of those books, though I think I get your point. But I wasn't saying that only D&D has this idea that common people can rise to super-duper-ness. The problem, in my opinion, is that the game assumes you want to become super-duper. That in turn convinces most players and GMs that if they're not becoming super-duper, something's wrong.

I don't mind games where PCs are amazingly powerful, and once I got used to the idea, I sorta enjoyed putting epic magic stuff into War of the Burning Sky's (and hopefully making it actually fit the milieu), but I don't know if it's possible to sell a D&D adventure series set in a war that doesn't end up with the heroes shapeshifting into cryohydras and crafting minor artifact spiked chains in order to attack a red dragon wearing lich earrings.

And that slightly saddens me.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I've actually never read any of those books, though I think I get your point. But I wasn't saying that only D&D has this idea that common people can rise to super-duper-ness. The problem, in my opinion, is that the game assumes you want to become super-duper. That in turn convinces most players and GMs that if they're not becoming super-duper, something's wrong.

I don't mind games where PCs are amazingly powerful, and once I got used to the idea, I sorta enjoyed putting epic magic stuff into War of the Burning Sky's (and hopefully making it actually fit the milieu), but I don't know if it's possible to sell a D&D adventure series set in a war that doesn't end up with the heroes shapeshifting into cryohydras and crafting minor artifact spiked chains in order to attack a red dragon wearing lich earrings.

And that slightly saddens me.

Sure it's possible. Black Company, Grim Tales, Thieves World, and a host of other d20 variants all handle that. Hell, you can do it in the core rules if you throw out CR and make a host of other changes, especially to spellcasters.

 

[Lord Ipplepop]

My players have always gotten, on average, a level about every/every other mission. And since the missions can take 3 or 4 sessions....
As long as my players are having fun, and the game doesn't seem too limiting or dull, they never ask about their advancement.

 

[Fenes]

I don't see a problem with characters levelling a lot - my ideal is not the "weak as a kitten spear-fodder to epic hero", but the "hero to hero" campaign. PCs are heroes when they start, and stay heroes. They learn new techniques and get new gear over time, but the changes they go through can happen in a few months easily - just consider all the changes soldiers can go through in a war.

 

[Nymrohd]

I find it very easy to cap players to a certain level in any edition of D&D I have played, including 4E. You can easily cap play to heroic or paragon for instance.

 

[Inyssius]

1. Leveling up. 3 months for martial characters and 6 months for casters. The theory being it takes times to learn new combats techniques; it takes time to learn new spells. This will easily add 10 years onto a 3.5 campaign and 15 years onto a 4.0 campaign.

Heh. I would flip that around, myself; it takes long practice to master a combat maneuver, even if you know exactly how it's done, but once you've read the Liber Darkmagicantulacorum the eldritch secrets contained therein are applicable right away.

Well, okay, I could see divine casters needing to spend long hours devoted to their gods--whether that happens to be in the form of Sanctified Contemplation (Pelor, a bunch of other dull squares), Walking The Earth (Fhlarglanagghanggolan), or Ale And Whores And The Occasional Bar-Fight (Kord, Olidammara, et cetera).

 

[Piratecat]

Tell your players not to complain. My old DM gave out a level every 15 sessions on average. Thank God that campaigns over with.

Heh. I resemble that remark.

Jester, how'd you account for teleport magic?

 

[Fenes]

Jester, how'd you account for teleport magic?

Banning teleport magic did a lot to make running D&D campaigns more enjoyable for me.