d20 Experience-Advancement Models

[Yair]

I've been finding the D&D-like experience award system problematic; the PCs reaching level 20 in 20 (game-time) years just wrecks the believability of it all for me, ruining the versimilitude of the world. Want to be a great wizard? Don't study in the tower for years - go kill a few orcs! With spells, a sword, or you bare hands - it doesn't matter. [Yes, other ways exist to overcome the challenge; that's not the point.]
So I've been trying to come up with models that will explain why overcoming challenges makes you have more HP, skills, BAB, spellcasting, and so on.

The one model I was able to came up with is the "Divine Amnesia" model. The characters were immensly powerful beings (gods) that didn't remember their true nature. XP was used as a "memory" gauge, and as the campaign developed the characters remembered more and more of their true selves. The implementation was not perfect, but it worked well enough to convince me it's a good idea.
But that was only one campaign. I want to branch out, take over the world... erggg.... new campaigns. So I turn to the good people at ENWorld for aid:

What (other) models can explain the "overcome challenge, raise level" paradigm?

 

[diaglo]

What (other) models can explain the "overcome challenge, raise level" paradigm?

actual training.

require the PCs to train to reflect back on what they just did to use/modify it so they can gain their new super cool power ups.

make the training = a very long time.

1 week per level if the player did in your thinking a good job
or upto 4 weeks per level if they did a poor job of roleplaying

and require a mentor to point out the problems. plus cost of 1500gp/ week. double the training if without a mentor.

ex. lvl 1 to gain level 2 = 1 to 4 weeks of training with a trainer. pr 2 tp 8 weeks without trainer. plus 1500gp/ week in both cases. in items used to train or people's knowledge or resources used... much like making a magic item.

 

[diaglo]

the gold piece cost will keep PCs adventuring. it will also keep gp very tight in the campaign.

for 2nd lvl to 3rd = 2 to 8 weeks training with mentor... 4 to 16 weeks without
3rd to 4th = 3 to 12 weeks... and so on.

 

[der_kluge]

Isn't it conceivable that at some point there would be no one left to train with? That, you'd be the highest level guy in a 50 mile radius? This kind of approach would make more sense in a skill-based system to me. I mean, if magic were a skill, or fighting were a skill, then you wouldn't need to find a 12th level rogue, you'd just need to find someone who had the equivalent skill in picking pockets, if that was what you were after.

I mean, if I were to train someone, I would be a very poor choice to teach them Java, or web development. I would, however, be a great choice to learn database concepts, SQL, or maybe UNIX. So, in that sense, I'm not really a 10th level computer programmer. I'm just a guy with lots of ranks in a few key areas.

So, I think it would make more sense to figure out what they were trying to advance in, and then have them seek out individuals who excel in those fields. So, if the fighter wants to take blindfighting, he might have to seek out the blind hermit who lives in the mountains for that, and then find the ranger to add 2 more points to his wilderness lore skill, and the captain of the guard to add another point to his BAB, etc.

Would make training a lot more interesting, and a bit more difficult.

 

[Doug McCrae]

The idea is that in order to advance you need both training/book-learning and real experience out in the field. A 'tower wizard' might know a lot about magical theory but he'd never be able to cast a spell with a troll in his face. In fact it probably takes him longer than a standard action to cast most spells. Problem is the rules don't represent this sort of wizard.

Another way to look at it is that the 'earn exp-increase in power' model is just a game fiction so that Dungeons & Dragons can work. In the fantasy world that the D&D rules imperfectly represent, the 'tower wizard' is perfectly feasible. But a PC can never be a tower wizard, otherwise the game wouldn't work.

 

[diaglo]

Isn't it conceivable that at some point there would be no one left to train with? That, you'd be the highest level guy in a 50 mile radius? This kind of approach would make more sense in a skill-based system to me. I mean, if magic were a skill, or fighting were a skill, then you wouldn't need to find a 12th level rogue, you'd just need to find someone who had the equivalent skill in picking pockets, if that was what you were after.

I mean, if I were to train someone, I would be a very poor choice to teach them Java, or web development. I would, however, be a great choice to learn database concepts, SQL, or maybe UNIX. So, in that sense, I'm not really a 10th level computer programmer. I'm just a guy with lots of ranks in a few key areas.

So, I think it would make more sense to figure out what they were trying to advance in, and then have them seek out individuals who excel in those fields. So, if the fighter wants to take blindfighting, he might have to seek out the blind hermit who lives in the mountains for that, and then find the ranger to add 2 more points to his wilderness lore skill, and the captain of the guard to add another point to his BAB, etc.

Would make training a lot more interesting, and a bit more difficult.

exactly along the lines of my posts too.

thus mentor 1 doesn't have to = mentor 2 or 3 or 1000.

you are training with them for specific help in specific areas they are prof.

 

[JoeGKushner]

This can be a tricky thing because you're playing a game.

If you look at fiction, most characters don't advance a lot. Elric would be a good example. Sure, he gets a sword that's vastly powerful, but he himself starts off as a damn good swordsmaster and epic level conjuror.

On the other hand, you have characters that advance at massive levels. Look at Rand, Pug, or Geb. They start off as essentailly farmboys but wind up, quickly in real time, to wield power capable of shattering the world.

This is an issue with D&D more because it's a level based game where certain things go up every level, regardless of other factors like hit points, bab, saving throws and magical capacity.

Part of it may be assumed training. If you're a fighter, rogue, or ranger, what are you doing out there while fighting? If you're putting you're all into it, I don't see why weapon focus or even something like power attack, would be an issue since you've been using you're weapons like that for a while.

Part of it depends on how complex you want your game to be and how much enjoyment the players are taking from the training. If training becomes something that no one looks forward to, you're doing it wrong. If you can't advance in the game for several sessions to get into 'roleplaying' the advancement, it's a game I don't know if I'd want to play.

 

[TerraDave]

I've been finding the D&D-like experience award system problematic; the PCs reaching level 20 in 20 (game-time) years just wrecks the believability of it all for me, ruining the versimilitude of the world. Want to be a great wizard? Don't study in the tower for years - go kill a few orcs! With spells, a sword, or you bare hands - it doesn't matter. [Yes, other ways exist to overcome the challenge; that's not the point.]
So I've been trying to come up with models that will explain why overcoming challenges makes you have more HP, skills, BAB, spellcasting, and so on.

The one model I was able to came up with is the "Divine Amnesia" model. The characters were immensly powerful beings (gods) that didn't remember their true nature. XP was used as a "memory" gauge, and as the campaign developed the characters remembered more and more of their true selves. The implementation was not perfect, but it worked well enough to convince me it's a good idea.
But that was only one campaign. I want to branch out, take over the world... erggg.... new campaigns. So I turn to the good people at ENWorld for aid:

What (other) models can explain the "overcome challenge, raise level" paradigm?

20 levels in 20 years is amazing pacing!!

Try 20 years in 20 months, that is probably more typical.

Your idea reminded me of the Amber novels...and I think the general explanation is that the PCs are already exceptional (hence the PC classes) through training, background, or something and are just highly receptive to going up levels. Or simply: "they are the heroes".

Still, too rapid advancement in game time just feels wierd to me at least, and various training rules or (down time) requirements can at least partially deal with the problem. These may need flexible interpretation: what if the party is in the middle of an adventure and it would be good for them to level?

Your post also touches on a different issue: how that Wizard in the tower gains levels (or other XP for that matter to make magic items). One thing I am trying for my new campaign is XP for downtime, as a flexible incentive to pace adventuring, and as a (partial) explanation for non-adventuring XPs.

 

[TerraDave]

actual training.

require the PCs to train to reflect back on what they just did to use/modify it so they can gain their new super cool power ups.

make the training = a very long time.

1 week per level if the player did in your thinking a good job
or upto 4 weeks per level if they did a poor job of roleplaying

and require a mentor to point out the problems. plus cost of 1500gp/ week. double the training if without a mentor.

ex. lvl 1 to gain level 2 = 1 to 4 weeks of training with a trainer. pr 2 tp 8 weeks without trainer. plus 1500gp/ week in both cases. in items used to train or people's knowledge or resources used... much like making a magic item.

Hmm, this sounds familiar...and its NOT OD&D! Are you suggesting a mechanic from another edition??

 

[Yair]

Your post also touches on a different issue: how that Wizard in the tower gains levels (or other XP for that matter to make magic items). One thing I am trying for my new campaign is XP for downtime, as a flexible incentive to pace adventuring, and as a (partial) explanation for non-adventuring XPs.

Good point. In my campaign the bulk of humanity was level 1 characters, with only unique characters having levels/HD. A mature person/monster just reached his full adult condition (might be a level 1 commoner for a regular human, or a level 10 Paladin Half-Celestial Elf for the son of a god, or so on), it didn't generally improved much after that. While I allowed some exceptions, the only real option for character-level advancement was arcane spellcaster levels, which in the campaign were inherently Evil (and hence limited to NPCs).
Of course, that is hardly a solution that will work for all campaigns.

I don't generally like the training model as it leads to needing lots of downtime which is usually not appropriate for the plots I have in mind. Or to the heroic style I espouse.
Such rules also only generally leave the versimilitude problems (such as the problem of elves' levels) as they are, and do not really explain why bluffing your way through the Court of the Fey Lord allowed you to out-pace your peers in the study of the art of swordmanship or in turning undead.

Thanks for all the answers, you folks! (I do appreciate them, even if I don't agree with some suggestions.)