Level advancement too fast?

[Durifern]

Just interested in someone else´s opinion.
I´m halfing XP awards and we don´t even focus on battles. Most of the time we have just one battle an evening.

IMO the scope of our campaign would change too drastically in too short a time.

What´s your opinion?

 

[Wormwood]

We tend to average a level every 3-4 sessions or so: fast enough to actually see some tangible progress, predictible enough for me to plan appropriate EL encounters.

Hell, a little faster would even be welcome.

 

[thegreatbuddha]

One of my old DMs used to add up the level of each party member and divide the result by 4, instead of the number of party members. We had 8 players + Dm, and it significantly slowed down the level progression, but it was still faster than in 1e/2e. Even so, he still had to beef up encounters from time to time so they were still challenging to us.

Hope that helps.

 

[Nifft]

I halve the XP from fights, but then give XP rewards for good role playing, reaching goals, etc. Also, I sometimes enforce a "no XP until you reach a goal" policy, which prevents leveling up in the middle of some dungeon.

-- Nifft

 

[greycastle]

we actually tryed almost the same thing, except we doubled the ranges you needed to gain levels *1000 to become level 1, 2000 level 2, 6000 level 3, etc*

Didn't work. the players grew restless, and wanted new abilities, and even though the fights were hard and more thinking and originality had to be thought out, the party had to constantly rest, and started completely avoiding fights that would gain experience, and started asking me for larger story awards 'which i was giving'. Stick to the current system, munchkiny experience awards are alright sometimes.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

I tend to think that a good advancement rate is one that allows you enough time to fully play with the toys of each level, but is fast enough that you never grow bored with the toys you have. For a standard game, that's the recommended progression. For a game with less combat, that may be slower, since there's less opportunity for you to try out each level's tricks.

 

[Eternalknight]

I halve the XP from fights, but then give XP rewards for good role playing, reaching goals, etc. Also, I sometimes enforce a "no XP until you reach a goal" policy, which prevents leveling up in the middle of some dungeon.

-- Nifft

I don't allow leveling until the end of an adventure.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

I don't allow leveling until the end of an adventure.

Let me use that! I put them through City of the Spider Queen. Not being able to level up in the adventure will kill them. And then they'll kill me, and I couldn't blame them.


It always depends on how long the adventure is and how close they're to the next level-up. Being 200 XP short of the next cap and having to wait another 3 evenings, going far over the cap, only because it's within the advanture sounds stupid, especially because it is within the adventure where you learn.

 

[Ferox4]

I also have been reducing the awards to slow progression. I think that the CR system is only so good as to provide an estimated value for encounters. As a DM one needs to take many other variables into account when awarding XP.

On another note, I don't allow leveling of characters during a session, but certainly in between sessions. Many modules are written for the PCs to advance 2-3 levels during play.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

On another note, I don't allow leveling of characters during a session, but certainly in between sessions. Many modules are written for the PCs to advance 2-3 levels during play.

My point. In CotSQ the PCs will advance 10 levels even.