Does it really matter how fast your characters level up?

[3catcircus]

Slow how? In the number of sessions you play? Or in the amount of in-world time that goes by? Because it's pretty easy to say "you do nothing important for a few years -- you fight a few goblins. Anything you want to accomplish in these five years? Make your checks." If that's when the next appropriate event happens, no one is rushing you through then.

If it's the XP/session rather than the XP/in-world time frame that's the pain...then the problem is leveling up about once a month (ish). The system handles slowing this down fine by allowing you to throw weaker enemies at the party for less XP. You don't have to match their EL every time. In fact, throwing in "lesser encounters" that serve only to hint at the deeper plot threads is generally part of the campaign, ne? Where the challenge isn't so much to their life and limb as it is to their goals and plans.

The issue I have is that while it may take 10 sessions to develop my plots, if I use the standard xp progression, the PCs may already be of such a high level that the baddies in those plots would be too high level for the situation. Orcs with 5 levels of fighter or warrior? I think not.

I don't understand how this flows from fast level advancement at all. What's stopping the PC's from taking on a challenge of a lower CR for information purposes? What's stopping them from finding out the why? Why isn't the why important? How can they ignore it? Because they're high level?

Even lower CR challenges *still* keep that xp odometer rolling... The *why* IS important - but if the PCs blow past it, then it means I have to do a lot of hand-waving or create revisionist history. It is painful enough to stat out encounters in 3.x, as is.

What stops a PC from finding out information when they are high level on their own? Why does being high level have to equal "kill the BBEG now?" You have a theoretically unlimited number of levels to deal with......just because they reach the level at which you can kill the BBEG doesn't mean they have to go kill the BBEG. If they stall, the BBEG can grow along with them. If they rush right in because they *can*, then the threads seem to be irrelevant as far as the PC's go, and that's pretty much the only reason the campaign exists -- for the PC's. If they don't care about the threads they're missing, that's not an advancement problem, I'd think...

Yeah - but the campaign world is MINE, as the DM, and I allow the players to let their PCs run around in it - so things that I want the PCs to do are as important as the things the players want their PCs to do.

You don't need to be high level to have epic adventures.

And you can also get into things that levels alone don't measure. At what level do you become Pharaoh of the Universe? What if it's FIRST? What if one of the PC's is elected to that post, and must thwart the GREAT FIEND EVIL FROM BEYOND SPACE AND TIME (e.g.: a tiefling with the numbers filed off)?

I'm not suggesting that this is the case at all - I am suggesting that players shouldn't be so over-eager to reach Uber-Lord Level that they miss fun things along the way - too many *players* equate level advancement with fun instead of equating the roleplaying experience as a whole with fun.

This seems backwards to me, but it might just be a different philosophy. I think it's my *job* as a DM to provide plot hooks that can support the characters. I'm not tied to a specific level range. If my PC's are level X when they need to face the BBEG, I'll make sure that the BBEG is X+2. I let the mechanics help tell the story, but I never let them get in the way of it.

If they're developing the storyline, why can't the storyline adjust to their development? Why do they *have* to take on this particular aspect of the story at this particular level? Shouldn't they be able to take on whatever aspect of the story they go to at whatever particular level they're at?

If they choose to try to redefine certain things in your campaign, isn't stopping them making sure that they don't develop the story line?

Certain things *have* to be done at certain levels. Other things can be done at *any* level. The issue I have is that there is a combination of rapid character advancement in terms of real-world time (i.e. going from 1st - 10th level over a span of 10 4-hour game sessions) coupled with the relative unfamiliarity that a player will have with has character's abilities due to that relatively short period of time.

To put it another way - I've been playing Neverwinter Nights ever since it was released. Sometimes 4 hours every night for a week, sometimes going months between firing up the game. I'm *still* only just now entering Luskan in chapter 2 of the original scenario and only at 11th level for my PC. Could I have played 24-hours a day for two weeks straight and reached this point? Sure. Could I have done it that way and learned all the nuances of how best to deal with a given encounter? No.

 

[Arnwyn]

I appreciate that your viewpoint my be different from my own, as long as you can appreciate that your viewpoint is just as limited as mine (meaning limited to your own "point of view").

Exactly. So, the answer to the original question of "Does it really matter how fast your characters level up?" is "Of course it does".

 

[diaglo]

Exactly. So, the answer to the original question of "Does it really matter how fast your characters level up?" is "Of course it does".

ditto.

 

[Shade]

Orcs with 5 levels of fighter or warrior? I think not.

Why not? Humans, elves, dwarves, halflings, etc. can have these levels, so why can't the orcs?

Even lower CR challenges *still* keep that xp odometer rolling... The *why* IS important - but if the PCs blow past it, then it means I have to do a lot of hand-waving or create revisionist history. It is painful enough to stat out encounters in 3.x, as is.

I think this is a trap that many DMs fall into...they begin writing a novel and want the players to simply move within the pre-written chapters, rather than allowing them to change the outcomes of the story.

Yeah - but the campaign world is MINE, as the DM, and I allow the players to let their PCs run around in it - so things that I want the PCs to do are as important as the things the players want their PCs to do.

Ouch. That line of thinking may cost you players in the long-run. If my DM took that attitude, or if I took that as a DM with my players, the campaign would be dead tomorrow. The campaign world should be a shared experience.

I'm not suggesting that this is the case at all - I am suggesting that players shouldn't be so over-eager to reach Uber-Lord Level that they miss fun things along the way - too many *players* equate level advancement with fun instead of equating the roleplaying experience as a whole with fun.

That some players equate level advancement as equal or more fun than roleplaying is true. Many players enjoy the mechanics much more than the story. In fact, this was a recent topic on WOTC's website:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sg/20050422a

Certain things *have* to be done at certain levels. Other things can be done at *any* level. The issue I have is that there is a combination of rapid character advancement in terms of real-world time (i.e. going from 1st - 10th level over a span of 10 4-hour game sessions) coupled with the relative unfamiliarity that a player will have with has character's abilities due to that relatively short period of time.

As others have pointed out, it depends on the experience level of the player. While this may be true with novice players, I can guarantee you I'm familiar with everything my character will be able to do at any level, even 20 higher than I'm currently at.

To put it another way - I've been playing Neverwinter Nights ever since it was released. Sometimes 4 hours every night for a week, sometimes going months between firing up the game. I'm *still* only just now entering Luskan in chapter 2 of the original scenario and only at 11th level for my PC. Could I have played 24-hours a day for two weeks straight and reached this point? Sure. Could I have done it that way and learned all the nuances of how best to deal with a given encounter? No.

To use another game as a coutnerpoint, you could play Baldur's Gate, completing every quest and exploring every nook-and-cranny, and level at a snail's pace. Or you could just follow the major quests and level quickly and complete the game much faster. Doing all the side quests doesn't necessarily prepare you for any of the battle against the major villains. Neither way is wrong--all that matters is that the player is having fun.

 

[Shade]

I already have a place where I can get little recognition for my accomplishments, advance at a very slow pace, and have to work hard to eek out minimum rewards for my efforts. It's called work.

Congratulations, toberane. You've got sigged!

That really sums up my feelings on the topic in a nice little soundbyte. Bravo!

 

[barsoomcore]

If you've got a bunch of players who then bitch and moan about it, then you've got real problems.

Yes, you do.

You don't have problems that are going to be solved by ANY XP-awarding scheme, but you DO have problems.

 

[green slime]

I find that if the levelling occurs too fast, most of the players lose track of their PC's abilities. Not every player reads the PHB inside and out, rushes out to purchase the latest splatbook, or memorises the next level's spells in anticipation of levelling.

It isn't a problem at low levels, there isn't so many spells/abilities to pick and choose from. But after about 12th, the burden of choosing which spells to memorise causes great anxiety.

Casual players need time to discover their character's new abilities and toys, which may take 4 or 5 sessions. They may not realise, and of course clamour for more experience/levels.... but once they start fumbling around...

of course, as long as fun is had, there is no problem.

 

[Psion]

While it is trivial to regulate the numbers, it isn't so trivial when all of the players are smart enough (or observant enough) to question the amount of xp they got...

That's a whole 'nuther kettle of fish. Group contract, player/GM authority divisions and observability.

I find that the best way to handle this is to be clear what you reward for up front and stick to it.

Might you occasionally overlook something that a player feel he needs to be rewarded for? Yes. And sometimes the player might be right. But clouding things just draws suspicions... not a place you want to be.

 

[Celebrim]

Casual players need time to discover their character's new abilities and toys, which may take 4 or 5 sessions.

I in general agree with your post, but strongly disagree with the notation that desiring to have a slow character advancement is in any way tied to the experience or seriousness of a player. It may well be tied to player personality, but it isn't tied to the idea that players that want a slower level advancement want a slower level advancement because they need to time to 'discover' what they can do in the game or in any way need to learn the sytem.

Rather, when I'm a player, I want to spend time with the character exploring what the character can do, even if I am already completely familiar with the mechanics of all his abilities long before I take them. It's not that I need to discover what the character can do, it 's that I want to spend an adequate ammount of time exploring my own ability to make use of that player's abilities against a range of challenges that the DM throws at me, before moving on and saying 'Ok, I've seen all this several times, lets see what happens when I both get a new ability and the challenges get steeper.'

I reject the notion that there is any player out there so experienced that they've actually fully explored '5th level' or any other level, to the point that the level itself is hoo hum for them. No one out thier has played a 5th level character of every class against every possible challenge that a 5th level character could reasonably be expected to handle. If someone out there doesn't like 5th level, its because of a particular combination of thier personal preferences and expectations and the particular narratives and preferences of thier DM.

If I have a 5th level rogue or 5th level cleric, or what have you, I want to spend a reasonable ammount of time with my skills, abilities, and spells before getting new ones. If I get say 'evasion' as new ability for a rogue, it's disappointing to me not to get to use it before getting a whole new set of abilities. If I get new spells or new feats that I've been looking forward to getting, then its disappointing to me to not to get to use them prior to getting yet more spells and feats - even if I was also looking forward to getting those abilities. To me every level of play is like a dish in a lavish banquet, and I want to throughly enjoy that dish before someone takes it away from me and gives me another one. The goal for me is not to finish the meal, but to enjoy it along the way.

Of course, this is coming from someone who never particularly liked dessert and would generally give it up in favor of going back and nibbling on previous courses, so YMMV. If you are a dessert fan, then by all means skip the meal and dig into the gooey goodness.

 

[toberane]

Exactly. So, the answer to the original question of "Does it really matter how fast your characters level up?" is "Of course it does".

And using the same logic, paradoxically, the answer is also "Of course it doesn't."