Can XP handle a dial?

[Crazy Jerome]

I think it would work fine, as long as with the different settings on the dial, they spelled out the likely consequences.

Instead of the default, you decide to give XP for treasure gained, and only for treasure gained, as a hardline measurement of rather abstract success. Ergo, the DM has to be careful that the treasure included fits within this rate, allow for some treasure to get missed, and expect a group that really buys into this to go after every bit of treasure, by hook or by crook, with any trick they can manage--ambush, sneaking away with it, talking monsters out of it, etc. If that sounds like a fun game for your group, you might want to try this. If not, don't.

Changes in a dial should have an effect on how things are done--ideally, a predictable effect, but a real effect nevertheless.

 

[Gold Roger]

I think you're missing the point a bit. The question isn't so much, whether you'd like an XP system that had different classes leveling at different XP...it's whether inclusion of that in 5E, as a dial or module, would be bad for the game or not. Would it make the game "not D&D"? Would it make people go crazy if it was part of the game as an option?

It's obvious you wouldn't like that type of leveling. To be honest, neither would I. But would it adversely affect 5E if it was included as an option?

Hmm, as said before, I wouldn't be adverse to a system with different advancement by class. In fact, I wouldn't play any old edition that has it as baseline, if the DM says "guys, normally in this system mages advance slower, but in this campaign you all advance at the same time."
That's like playing 3rd edition with AD&D multiclassing or 4e with 3rd edition multiclassing. I guess I just see those specific ways of advancement as mutualy exclusive. If wotc can disprove through gameplay here, I'd be glad. I somehow doubt they'll try though.

Apart from that issue, I think a xp and leveling dial is in fact absolutely necessary.

Not because I can't change the dial by myself or won't. I've tinkered with xp in most games I've run, usually because I found advancement to be way to fast.

But a few pages of optional rules for various advancement speeds, various ways to award xp and doing away with xp altogether will be very welcome.

 

[dkyle]

I think having classes use different XP progressions as a means of balance would be a very bad design. Because it significantly complicates two (I think rather common) ways of running the game:

1) XP always split evenly, and new characters come in at the party level. With different leveling rates "party level" doesn't work. Current Party XP could work, but that would be a pain.
2) Not using XP at all, and leveling when the DM says so. With different level rates, it's very tricky to get the leveling right, without favoring "slow" classes at the expense of "fast" classes.

In addition, it makes 3.X style multiclassing very tricky.

An the other hand, I don't think even-XP per level really puts a damper on any playstyle. It certainly would be a bad choice for Core, and I don't see a good way to do it as a module. It just changes too much of the game at a fundamental level.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Balance what?

These are the XP you receive for whatever the adventure, your treasure, your monsters killed, missions completed, whatever...What's to balance?

Option A is how my group handles XP...Option B is how your group handles XP...What/where is there a need for balance?

Maybe I read it wrong... i thought you meant, that classes level up on a unified xp table as one option or on a class based table as a different option. How should they balance that?

Wizards level up at 2000xp instead of 1000xp as the rogue? Should he be more powerful then? What if you don´t use class based tables?

Maybe if you also add xp for using class abilities like in ADnD. But I guess you could just make everyone only receiving half xp for defeating monsters and then add class based bonuses. It seems to me as if that is more elegant (as much as I liked the bard to advance in levels more quickly back in ADnD days)

 

[Greatwyrm]

Does everyone (group to group) in 5e HAVE to use XP the same way?

In a word, no.

The only thing you need to worry about with xp is everyone agreeing to how you use it. When I DM'd 2nd and 3rd, I was a real stickler on xp. When I ran 4th, I just told everybody they were going to level when that section of the story arc was over, regardless of how they got there. In both cases, everybody agreed and fun was had by all. Even in your own group, there's no reason you couldn't vary things as long as everyone is cool with it.

 

[Dausuul]

Now, for me, one of those things that *is* D&D is XP and "leveling up." So, I'll be using it in my games no matter what 5e does...and yes, I am one of those who advocates and likes the "balancing" elements of different classes leveling differently.

This thread is not about that..per se. It's worked for me for 30 years and I see no reason to change it now, so please to be sparing me the why's and how's I'm so wrong on that issue. I do not care/won't listen.

The question for this thread IS...

Is an XP system something that 5e can put on a OFFICIAL "use it like you want it" dial/optional modes of using or would that just make everyone crazy?

I'm thinking, like:
Option XP Module 1: Everyone XPs at the same rate (say 1,000 just as an example)
Option XP Module 2: Here's the XP tables/levels for each class
Option XP Module 3: I dunno...something else.
Option XP Module 4: Don't use XP at all and "level up" when the DM sez so?

Can 5e get away with that (and still *be* D&D) or would that be moving too far away from that sacred cow burger? Does everyone (group to group) in 5e HAVE to use XP the same way?

Just a thought from a few of the other threads floatin' around today.
--SD

Seems perfectly workable to me, as long as XP is used only for leveling up (i.e., we don't have mechanics with XP costs like 3E did). Module #2 could be used to create the "old school" feel, where fighters are stronger at the start (faster advancement) and then wizards take over in the late game. Modules #1 and #4 would be for those who prefer to have consistent power levels.

 

[Lanefan]

There needs to be a second layer added to this...

Option XP Module 1: Everyone XPs at the same rate (say 1,000 just as an example)
Option XP Module 2: Here's the XP tables/levels for each class
Option XP Module 3: I dunno...something else.
Option XP Module 4: Don't use XP at all and "level up" when the DM sez so?

...and that is rate of advancement. For example, for Modules 1 and 2 there should be several tables ranging from very fast to very slow (see Pathfinder for an example); while with Modules 3 and 4 there needs to be a discussion in the DMG about speed of advancement and what the knock-on effects might be if it is very slow or very fast.

Also, Ièd like to see the default be variable XP in that when XP are given out for an encounter they only go to those characters who actively participated in it. For example, if your party is camped for the night and the camp gets attacked by a couple of Orcs that the night watch deal with while everyone else sleeps, only those on watch get XP.

Lanefan

 

[Lord Zack]

I'd like to see xp for treasure, xp for quests and rules/guidelines for using different ratios for each. For instance getting like 15 xp or so, for one goblin, thus 150 xp for a group of 10, but getting say 300 xp from they're horde of 3000 silver pieces, for a total of 450 xp. Also, rules for varying the amount of xp needed to level, for those who want faster or slower rates of advancement.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I would think that XP, as an arbitrary metagame mechanic intended to pace the game, shape the style, or provide a sense of achievement, would be one of the easiest things to have a "dial" for. There are plenty of ways to do it, none that are sacred cows, and there is no need for XP at all. Let the designers go nuts.

 

[Lord Zack]

Interesting piece of gaming history. In the Blackmoor campaign (i.e. Dave Arneson's campaign) the first dungeon crawl had only one survivor. This was his first adventure and for surviving it he was promoted to "hero"-level, basically the equivalent of 4th level. No xp involved at that point. I'm not sure when the concept of xp was created.