D&D 5E Does progression rate slow down?

[S'mon]

I have seen this before and it may work for you, but I don't want the pc's to be special because they were born with the mutant gene to level up. The whole 'you are all destined to be heroes' thing isn't my bag. I want them to feel they earned it through actions, not birthright.

If you don't want a 'Big Damn Heroes' feel I definitely wouldn't recommend 5e. Classic D&D is probably best since Ftr-1s are functionally identical to 1 hd monsters and most of the other classes start even weaker. Obviously 4e is anathema to this 'you're nothing special' approach. I think it also works poorly in 3e/PF, it can be done but assuming 3e/PF NPCs can earn XP like PCs often results in worlds where the average experienced person is 6th-8th level and 1st level PCs are barely fit to clean the toilets.

 

[werecorpse]

Oh I want big damn heroes but I want it to be because they earned it not because they are special

 

[S'mon]

Oh I want big damn heroes but I want it to be because they earned it not because they are special

Even 5e PCs still have to earn it - they just have more potential than the NPCs. It's not going to be easy!

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Presumably you're not referring to the 1 hd & 2 hd baseline ones like Commoners, Tribal Warriors, Guards, Bandits?

Right, I'm not referring to anything that is what AD&D would call "0th level". I was thinking primarily of things like Berserkers, Clerics, Knights, etc. Obviously someone who is just a normal joe off the street will have stats basically like a Commoner, perhaps a Guard or Tribal Warrior (5%?) based on setting and who he is. (AFB but I am assuming here that Guards and Tribal Warriors have trash HP, 1d8+1 or similar, and mediocre stats.)

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

To get to 7th level and have 2 near TPK's. I still think this is a scenario where it's not actually as deadly as presented in the "NPC's don't adventure cos it's too dangerous" scenario. The suggestion in those arguments tends to be along the lines that 100 first levels becomes 50 second becomes 25 3rd becomes 12 4th becomes 6 5th etc. So that to get a 7th level character 99 have died along the way. But experience tells the players that to get a party of 4 7th levels maybe 2-8 have died along the way.

I do realise that I am splitting hairs and that we basically agree about the important stuff. Mea culpa

To be clear: it was 0 deaths up to 7th level (which made me worry) and 2 TPKs (karma'ed away) from 7th to 11th[1]. I'm happy with the trend, because the implication is that you should have about a 1% chance of making it to 20th level if you don't have access to karma rewinds... which means there's plenty of incentive to retire as soon as you can afford it. Unless you're a PC and therefore mind-controlled by an uncaring god of a player.

[1] Max party level. I use character trees so the party average level is heterogenous and changes every session, but the highest-level PC is now 11th level.

 

[the Jester]

I don't know how you think it gets in the way of player freedom though.

I'll answer this.

Often in a game with milestone leveling, the pcs are locked into following the DM's quest. To level, you have to reach a specific milestone (you level once the miller is rescued from the orcs, then again when you defeat the orcish chief). The problem with pc freedom is that the pcs may not want to rescue the miller or deal with the orcs at all. Some milestone DMs will accommodate this, but others will fold their arms and say, "You want that level? Rescue the damned miller!"

A game that uses xp allows the pcs much more freedom in choosing their own adventures. Oh, let's go kill three goblins and call it a day. In a milestone system, that's worth nothing at all. XPs reward the players for taking on minor threats, or likewise, give commensurately greater rewards for taking on severe threats. Meanwhile, the milestone xp system effectively rewards both the same- with a level at the milestone point. It doesn't explicitly force the pcs onto the rails, but often, it denies the game's main reward to those who won't jump on the train.

Obviously, YMMV, and this is not true for all milestone games, but I think that's a common concern amongst those who favor xp over milestone levels.

 

[S'mon]

Right, I'm not referring to anything that is what AD&D would call "0th level". I was thinking primarily of things like Berserkers, Clerics, Knights, etc. Obviously someone who is just a normal joe off the street will have stats basically like a Commoner, perhaps a Guard or Tribal Warrior (5%?) based on setting and who he is. (AFB but I am assuming here that Guards and Tribal Warriors have trash HP, 1d8+1 or similar, and mediocre stats.)

Everything except Commoners has at least 2d8 and is really quite badass from the POV of a 1st level PC.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

In that case, no, I'd make those NPCs rare-ish too. Trained soldiers aren't a dime a dozen.

 

[Grainger]

Only if you have a godlike DM pulling strings for you to make sure that every day you encounter exactly the right number of monsters to fill up your "quote" from the XP chart in the DMG. (And they have to be solo monsters too, because large groups will fill up your quota at 4x the rate without granting 4x the XP.) This can fail in two ways. Either:

1.) you don't meet enough victims (er, "foes") and so spend a year hunting orcs on the frontier, averaging 1 orc per day with only 36,500 XP at the end of the year, or

2.) you accidentally meet the beholders and vampires on day 5 of your adventure when you are still level 4, instead of on day 18 when you've already killed dozens of trolls and bulettes and giants and are now level 13, and the beholders and vampires unceremoniously kill you.

#1 seems far more likely to me, especially if other soldiers before you have already depleted monster stocks. Liches may be a renewable resource due to phylacteries, but giants and beholders are basically nonrenewable.

Well, this illustrates another reason why the standard progression rate is absurd. If the logical extension of it is that the monsters of the world have been largely cleared out by rampaging mid-level adventurers, then it doesn't give rise to the type of world that most of us think of as D&D. Really, my point is that the progression doesn't make sense in the context of an ongoing world. It might make a "zero to hero" campaign possible to play through in a year or two of play, but it doesn't lead to a very sensible world if you think about (and apply) its ramifications on that world.

 

[Grainger]

I'll answer this.

Often in a game with milestone leveling, the pcs are locked into following the DM's quest. To level, you have to reach a specific milestone (you level once the miller is rescued from the orcs, then again when you defeat the orcish chief). The problem with pc freedom is that the pcs may not want to rescue the miller or deal with the orcs at all. Some milestone DMs will accommodate this, but others will fold their arms and say, "You want that level? Rescue the damned miller!"

A game that uses xp allows the pcs much more freedom in choosing their own adventures. Oh, let's go kill three goblins and call it a day. In a milestone system, that's worth nothing at all. XPs reward the players for taking on minor threats, or likewise, give commensurately greater rewards for taking on severe threats. Meanwhile, the milestone xp system effectively rewards both the same- with a level at the milestone point. It doesn't explicitly force the pcs onto the rails, but often, it denies the game's main reward to those who won't jump on the train.

Obviously, YMMV, and this is not true for all milestone games, but I think that's a common concern amongst those who favor xp over milestone levels.

Or, just give the players some experience per session (and I say "players" deliberately, as it is really the players getting it, not the PCs). This means you control how much they level up, you aren't rewarding hack-and-slash play, and you aren't railroading (they don't have to reach the DM's favoured milestone). As long as they actually go adventuring (and don't sit around town drinking pina coladas - whatever they are), then it should all work out fine. You can also adjust the amount if they start to "game" the system, or if the progression is going too slowly or too quickly for the DM and players' tastes. It's what I do, and I am excellent, so ergo it must be, um... excellent.