Level advancement too fast?

[kreynolds]

What´s your opinion?

I give full XP. In a standard game, my players average a level every 2 games. If the game is combat heavy, they tend to average a level a game. In games where there are only two players (instead of the assumed four for almost every module out there), I give a little more than usual (and those games are usually the ones that average a level a game).

 

[Li Shenron]

I think Lord Pendragon has summarized the subject perfectly.

Experience is the tool in the hands of a DM to properly balance character advancement to satisfy the gamers. If your players are hungry munchkins who starve when between levels, it's up to you to throw them more crumbs. If you feel otherwise they are not using much of their PC's abilities, you can give them more time to enjoy them: also I have always thought that it is not nice advancing and getting new abilities if you haven't tried the ones you gained last time you levelled up.

Anyway, the DMG suggests this, that the DM can use Xp tables when he feels insecure, especially if he's not expert yet, but only he should really be in charge of level advancing, and that's why the DMG is totally free about story awards or RP awards.

 

[Iron_Chef]

We started allowing everyone to spend their XP to buy extra bonuses and feat-like abilities. This made the players happy, because they could get extra abilities, and also slowed advancement, because they were spending their XP as fast as they got it.

Refer to FFG's "Path Of _" series of books for ideas on special training like fighting styles, mental disciplines, etc. Also, refer to Bastion's Guildcraft book for ideas on how to spend XP to buy ranks in various guilds, orders and clubs, each with their own rewards. Making them spend XP to climb the ranks of an organization is great because it also ties them in more closely with the group, and makes an excellent springboard for adventures and intrigue within and without.

With the guildcraft and "Path of" systems, finally all characters have something worthwhile to blow their XP on, not just spellcasters making magic items. Check it out!

 

[S'mon]

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?

Give them some decent roleplay XP, then. By not giving any formulae for CRs, 3e puts the PCs' rate of advancement squarely in the DM's court, for good or ill.

If standard advancement rate is 1 level/13 typical fights, your system without roleplay XP would give 1 level/26 game sessions. If that seems ok to you, fine. If you give roleplay XP equal to combat XP, you're looking at 1 level/13 game sessions, which is still only 1/4 of the DMG's suggested standard advancement rate, but should cause less player resentment.

Edit: I give full CR-XP for fights, sometimes more with circumstance bonuses, plus goodly roleplay/goal-oriented XP awards. The PCs are currently around 10th level and seem to advance about 1/4 sessions or so. A lot of the fights, though tough, are with creatures of lower CR than their level, which really inhibits the XP gain. Last session (about 5-6 hours gaming) there was only one fight, with CR4 wererat rogues. It was quite a tough fight but the XP award was rather meagre. I like level advancement to slow somewhat at higher levels, and the decreasing XP awards for lower CR opponents support this nicely. OTOH an epic battle vs a high-CR BEG gives lots of XP, which seems right also.

Edit2: My preferred advancement rates, roughly:

Level 1-3: 1 level/session
Level 4-6: 1/2 sessions
Level 7-9: 1/3 sessions
Level 10-12: 1/4 sessions
Level 13-15: 1/5 sessions
Level 16-18: 1/6 sessions
Level 19-20: 1/7 sessions

 

[Fenes 2]

We do not use xp anymore. We level up every few months, whenever we feel like it. In one weekly campaign that was converted to 3E at level 5 back in 2000 the PCs will reach level 12 next friday. In another, where we progressed a bit faster, the PCs started at level 7 in 2001 and are now level 14, but we are slowing down.
Back when we used XP we only gave story award xp for completing an adventure, and that was based upon time (sessions) spent, not CR, and calculated according to the desired rate of advancement.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

I hate games where you need years to get to two-digits. (especially since I had several games where people just stopped to turn up).

 

[S'mon]

We do not use xp anymore. We level up every few months, whenever we feel like it. In one weekly campaign that was converted to 3E at level 5 back in 2000 the PCs will reach level 12 next friday. In another, where we progressed a bit faster, the PCs started at level 7 in 2001 and are now level 14, but we are slowing down.

In my current game with sessions every 1/2 to 2/3 weeks, the first PCs started around level 6 in mid 2002, the highest level is now 12th, 6 levels in about 20 games,with the average level at 10th.

Edit: at a guess it will take around 50 more sessions for the PC group to reach Epic level, in about 2 years of real-time.

 

[Drawmack]

I just kept using the XP formula I used in 2e

x/y * z


x = The average amount of xp needed for the average party member to reach next level. (very simplified in 3e to pl * 1000)

y = The number of members in the party.

z = encounter level. (in 2e I used a 5 level system from very simple to impossible, in 3e I just use encounter level)

 

[Petrosian]

I dropped Xp entirely.

I figure it like this...

the Xp progression charts and the monster xp challenge ratings Xp awards were designed to make 13-14 challenging encounters a level up event.

So why do the following...

take encounter---dosomemath---award points---dosomemath---check vs chart---dosomemath---level up if we have gotten 13-14 encounters worth...

when you can do this...

count encounters...when 13-14 are done, level up.

a lot less math.

So the net result is every once in a while, about every 2 months, i tell them they level up.

For various "lose Xp", that turns into a number of "encounters" or actually sessions delay in that character leveling up.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

So why do the following...

take encounter---dosomemath---award points---dosomemath---check vs chart---dosomemath---level up if we have gotten 13-14 encounters worth...

when you can do this...

count encounters...when 13-14 are done, level up.

Because the encounters could be easier (resulting in less XP), because the encounters could be harder (resulting in more XP) and because the party gets additional XP for RP and Story?

[edit]oh, and because they might have spent XP for Item Creation and Spells (and might have lost XP for really stupid behavior)