By the book campaign, 2 levels in one session!

[Jdvn1]

So a total of 15 experience granting challenges (and possibly awards for mission completes and roleplaying which brings it up to 19 or so?). This is well into level and a half by the 13.5 encounters per level guideline the experience system is based on.

It's 13.3333... encounters. And should be closer to 1.125 levels.

My question is: Were they all equal-level encounters?

Edit: Apparently not. So, yeah, sounds about right.

 

[Evilhalfling]

I did a player survey at the end of the last campaign. And the players wanted an advancement rate of level per 3-4 sessions.
slightly slower than the lvl per 3 sessions of the last campaign.
I recomend this method, and most of he players were reasonable with suggestions.

They also requested starting at 3rd and higher levels of treasure (by nature I am stingy and the PCs ended the last campaign with about half of the recommened wealth level.) the same level of complicated plots, near fatal experiances, and occasional death and dismemberment of close realtives.
So 4 sessions, 7 hrs each they are 4th level about halfway to 5th.

 

[S'mon]

In the campaign I'm playing in it only took two 4-5 hour sessions to move from 1st to 2nd and it looks like the PCs will level up again next session which will be the fifth gaming session, which has all been using standard XP with a largish party (six PCs).

(I'm GMing this campaign) - in fact in this campaign I've actually been deliberately conservative with XP/CRs so that on average I'm awarding between about 2/3 and 3/4 standard XP, with journal XP on top meaning that PCs who do journals get roughly standard XP.

Examples: I reduced the kobold War-1 mooks' CR to 1/8, on the basis they only had d4 hit dice (& 3 hp). The War-1 orcs were CR 1/2, but they had 8 hp/die + Toughness and CON 12 = 12 hp each, with STR 17, chain shirt, heavy shield, and some of them using falchions single-handed, that's a pretty tough CR 1/2, mitigated by their terrible WIS giving -2 on the Will save (good thing you have Loren the 'Sleeper')

And as MonsterMash says, with a party of 6 PCs fighting encounters around EL+2 over party level, they're levelling roughly every 2-3 4-hour sessions. I'm enjoying this pace but I wouldn't want it to be any faster and I'd expect it to slow down to 1/3-4 sessions soon, I can see how with a tough 4-PC group and standard XP one could easily level at least once a session.

 

[Gez]

By the book, you can only gain one level per session, since if you enough XP for gaining more than one level, you gain only one level, and your XP total is reduced to be just one short of the next level.

So, after one session, they should be level 2 with 2999 XP, not level 3 with 3000+ XP.

 

[D+1]

By the book, you can only gain one level per session, since if you enough XP for gaining more than one level, you gain only one level, and your XP total is reduced to be just one short of the next level.

That's not quite accurate. By the book you can only gain one level per ADVENTURE, not per game session. The intent is that characters not be allowed to make large, instantaneous advancement leaps of multiple levels. Advancement need not be rigid but it should clearly be at a SOMEWHAT steady rate. This is a rule that has carried over a couple of editions (at least since 1E if not before).

While it's not actually written into the rules this has implications for how DM's ought to be designing adventures, and leaves open to any interpretation just what "one adventure" is definable as. A single adventure can take place in a single 30-room dungeon, across the entire face of a campaign world, or onboard a single ship. It can involve dozens of combats, only a few, or even none at all. It can take four of your weekly 5-hour game sessions or only 2 hours of part of a game session. The PC's might play the first half of a given "adventure" when they're 5th level and never finish it until they figure out key clues and then they're actually 7th level when they start the second half.

The DMG talks fairly vaguely about what "a single adventure" really is. The rule about advancing only one level is actually in the PH, not the DMG, and frankly I think it's a bit of a hinky "rule". The DMG never mentions anything about it in all the chapters and sections on designing adventures, awarding XP, and so forth. I suppose that like all the rules you ignore it at your own peril of sending a campaign into an unexpected tailspin, but I wouldn't worry.

Given the lack of any functional ENFORCEMENT of this rule and the highly arbitrary nature of how/when to apply it to an undefined quantity like "a single adventure", it cannot be interpreted as anything but a guideline. It's a mere suggestion that if somehow a PC does manage to gain XP sufficient to advance two levels at once he should be forcibly held back. This would be in the interests of pacing mostly (I assume is what the designers were thinking) but probably also fairness to and balance with other PC's. But it's nothing anyone should ever get in a twist over escpecially since the very structure of the 3E rules tends to maintain the game at a given pace.

 

[S'mon]

Re XP awarding, I try to avoid giving more than 1000 x Level XP in a single XP award, but I may give XP more than once in a session, certainly at least once/session. As a player I'd hate to have to wait to the end of an n-session adventure to get my XP.

 

[Timeboxer]

This would be in the interests of pacing mostly (I assume is what the designers were thinking) but probably also fairness to and balance with other PC's.

And yet it really just ends up being annoying. Speaking as someone who was several levels lower than the party and, contrary to what the normal 3.5 XP rules would suggest, earned significantly less XP than the rest of the party who were higher-level because the GM decided (rather arbitrarily, since he wasn't bothering to do so before) to go all RAW and tell me that I wasn't allowed to gain two levels' worth of XP.

 

[MonsterMash]

While GMing I do tend to use either reduced XP awards or else a revised XP chart for levels and I reduce the amount of treasure per encounter accordingly. One reason why I rarely complain about other GM's being strict or tight with awards.

I wouldn't have PCs level twice in one game session, but certainly levelling within 'an adventure' is likely, but I only allow it when there is rest (even if it's just overnight).

 

[Bront]

I play in 2 groups. One group tends to be a bit looser on advancement and experience, and generaly gives it out more as a "I feel this is an appropriate award for XP due to chalenges overcome and RP", and another, more by the book advancement. The more casual group tends to flow a bit better, with levels granted at more appropriate times in the story, while the other campaign has given advancement a bit more of a mechanical feal to it.

It all depends on the group and the game. I find that as a player, I get more personal character attachment with advancing from a lower level, as well as it tends to allow for an opertunity to grow as a character (IE, expand class knowledge, change tactics, shape character pesonality). Starting a bit higher tends to allow you to assume a bit more about the character, and I find can lead to a bit more confusion about who the character is because the story is shaped a bit more by ideal circumstances than roleplay and character experiences.

Generaly though, I try to start at 2nd level to allow a character to multi-class early and be a bit more survivable (Max HP for both levels).

On the other hand, if I were to do a modern game, I'd probably start around 5th level, allowing people to start in or get close to the advanced classes.

 

[Jolly Giant]

I've seen quite a few "2 levels in one session", but then I've also DMed quite a few 12 - 24 hour sessions...