3e Character Advancement Too Fast?

[Umbran]

I went with "just right", because it's all in how you play it. Some folks crank through a half-dozen encounters a session, some go through one. HOw fast you level up frequently has less to do with the system itself than it has to do with how you approach the game.

 

[Iced Tea]

i think that the level progression is just rightand. I woudl have ot say that i like gettin a level every 1-2 sessions. however, almost everone who has played has died atleast once. because my brother likes to give us a challenge

 

[Conaill]

For those people who think the advancement is too fast...

1) do you feel the "designed" advancement of one level every 3-4 sessions, or 13.3 encounters is too fast?

or

2) do you feel that advancement in your own campaign goes faster than that.

And for those that are in the second camp, how many of you are playing with more powerful characters than the game was designed for? If you're playing 40-point characters, it's not really surprising that you breeze through level-appropriate encounters, and increase in level faster than the designers intended. Likewise, if your DM adjusts the encounter CR upwards to compensate, you'll be gaining more XP per encounter and also advance faster...

It's one thing to disagree with the advancement rate the system was designed for. But if you start messing with the as-designed power balance, you shouldn't be surprised that the advancement rate gets out of whack...

 

[Ed Cha]

The first couple of levels go way too fast for my personal tastes. I actually held back my players in the beginning because I thought their PCs should not reach 2nd level until they'd at least completed an adventure. Right now, PCs can go from 1st to 2nd level (effectively doubling their power) within their first couple of encounters.

At higher levels, I think the level is progression can be good as you're not stuck in the mid-levels forever like in previous editions. However, something like a slightly sloping upward curve for the time it takes to advance might be better. Also, it should really be a monumental challenge to reach 20th level.

 

[Nifft]

I voted "slightly too fast", but I'm the DM, so my PCs advance at exactly the correct rate.

Generally I use a 1/2 XP vs. CR, but then I give "story awards" for doing heroic things, stopping the bad guys, etc. -- which balances things out.

-- Nifft

 

[RangerWickett]

I tend to start PCs at level 5, because I wanted the option of a Harry Potter-esque adventure where young'uns learn magic slowly. I mean, Harry's just 14, and he can cast pretty impressive spells, it seems (Patronus would be, what, summon monster 3 at least?).

Anyway, I realized that core D&D advancement are silly and too fast when I proposed this idea.

Two rivals at a dueling school are both 1st level Fighters. Every day they fight each other with padded weapons, hoping to defeat the other. We'll assume they're pretty evenly-matched, so they'll each win half the time. Since the damage being dealt is subdual, they'll heal up quickly enough to fight against the next day.

So, after 8 days, each of them has won 4 times, defeating 4 CR 1 encounters, each worth 300 XP. Each has thus earned 1200 XP, making them both 2nd level.

6 days later, with 3 more wins each (1800 XP more), they'll both be 3rd level.

8 days after that, they're 4th level.

Every few days they change up they're duels. Sometimes they fight blind-folded, sometimes with their off-hand, sometimes on dangerous precipices, or with different terrain, in harsh weather, at night, with different weapons, etc. This way their training covers

I think we figured out that 140 days of daily training, these two fighters would both be 20th level. Sure, they wouldn't have any magic items from adventuring, but they have tons of experience fighting. Even if we use the General Downtime variant option in the DMG, where you have to spend 1d4 days per level resting whenever you level up, that's still merely an average of 525 more days. So after 665 days of training and study, not even two years worth of time, you have 20th level fighters. Sound a little fast to you?

 

[Someone]

I believe the pace is perfect to me; playing every week, a campaing that last a year takes the PCs from level 1 to 20. Others can think differently, but thankfully the system is easy to houserule. Simply think how many years should your campaing last and divide the XP awards by that.

 

[Zerakon]

If you can reach 20th level in one year of one-session-per-week playing, that to me seems way too "easy." Granted, different strokes for different folks, but I would have far preferred that the standard system be something more like:

"session" = ~5 hours solid playing

~3 sessions to reach 2nd level
~7 sessions to reach 3rd level
~12 sessions to reach 4th level
~18 sessions to reach 5th level
~25 sessions to reach 6th level
(so half a year of playing 5 hours per week -> 6th level)
~33 sessions to reach 7th level
~42 sessions to reach 8th level
~52 sessions to reach 9th level
(so about a year of playing 5 hours per week -> 9th level)
~63 sessions for 10th
~75 sessions for 11th
(1.5 years of playing -> 11th level)
~88 sessions for 12th
~102 sessions for 13th
(2 years -> 13th level)
~117 sessions for 14th
~133 sessions for 15th
(2.5 years -> 15th level)
~150 sessions for 16th
~168 sessions for 17th
(3 years -> 17th level)
~187 sessions for 18th
~207 sessions for 19th
(4 years -> 19th level)
~228 sessions for 20th

That sort of schedule would let characters develop more slowly, put more of an emphasis on low-to-mid-level play, which IMO is where D&D truly shines as a game system. Redesigning the levelling system so that players can make 20th in a year seems to me to be a mistake, sort of removing some of the mystique and challenge from the game. It's almost like WotC wanted to bring the pen-and-paper game closer to the computer style of play where you can bring up characters to high level very quickly and easily. That's a shame. Oh well, I'll just house rule the level system and get over it.

-- Zerakon the Game Mage

 

[Iced Tea]

it seems to me that the people who like it slow are into really into character developement, which is not a bad thing, and those like me, are a little more into "developing" your character, which is alson not a bad thing . I think it just proves how versitile this game really is.

 

[Pants]

I tend to start PCs at level 5, because I wanted the option of a Harry Potter-esque adventure where young'uns learn magic slowly. I mean, Harry's just 14, and he can cast pretty impressive spells, it seems (Patronus would be, what, summon monster 3 at least?).

Anyway, I realized that core D&D advancement are silly and too fast when I proposed this idea.

Two rivals at a dueling school are both 1st level Fighters. Every day they fight each other with padded weapons, hoping to defeat the other. We'll assume they're pretty evenly-matched, so they'll each win half the time. Since the damage being dealt is subdual, they'll heal up quickly enough to fight against the next day.

So, after 8 days, each of them has won 4 times, defeating 4 CR 1 encounters, each worth 300 XP. Each has thus earned 1200 XP, making them both 2nd level.

6 days later, with 3 more wins each (1800 XP more), they'll both be 3rd level.

8 days after that, they're 4th level.

Every few days they change up they're duels. Sometimes they fight blind-folded, sometimes with their off-hand, sometimes on dangerous precipices, or with different terrain, in harsh weather, at night, with different weapons, etc. This way their training covers

I think we figured out that 140 days of daily training, these two fighters would both be 20th level. Sure, they wouldn't have any magic items from adventuring, but they have tons of experience fighting. Even if we use the General Downtime variant option in the DMG, where you have to spend 1d4 days per level resting whenever you level up, that's still merely an average of 525 more days. So after 665 days of training and study, not even two years worth of time, you have 20th level fighters. Sound a little fast to you?

The problem with your example is that the two fighters are gaining experience for challenges with little risk. This is exactly the same reason why high level characters don't get XP for defeating cr 1/2 Orcs anymore. I'd give less experience than what is currently listed in this example.