Levelling up

[MonsterMash]

Old one,

That's quite similar to what I do, but I will allow a new feat that matches what they've been doing, e.g. a fighter can pick up Greater Weapon Specialisation, but not something not related. Likewise you can increase levels in the current class, but not suddely add levels in something else without a training opportunity.

 

[Cor Azer]

Huh... none of the options really apply to me - in my case, it depends on the campaign. In one I want to make downtime obvious and useful, so the party regular takes time off to train (ie, whenever they need to level), but in another the whole campaign is more laid back and haphazard, so training isn't required.

I'll don't know if I'll keep requiring training or not in future campaigns. I like the idea of forcing some downtime between adventures (so everything doesn't hit the PCs at a rapid fire pace), but I'm learning I can do that better with in-game deadlines and non-adventuring responsibilities better than with enforced training requirements.

 

[Cor Azer]

Above is an example of how I give out XP.

Very cool.

Is it much bookkeeping on your part?

 

[MrFilthyIke]

Above is an example of how I give out XP.

I really like that nemmerle.

I chose "Whatever they did in OD+D, all else is a pale imitation"

 

[Li Shenron]

So far I've never "required" training to level up, and I never will. I have always allowed characters to level up during the adventures, possibly between session to avoid stopping the game for something that every player can do on his own.

Not that I like this idea very much either, but requiring them to go back to town only in order to get the level-up benefit is worse IMHO. Actually it is even "more worse" to discriminate between combat abilities and spells (some DM require downtime training for spells, but not for combat bonuses and feats), which is utterly unfair since it only hurts some of the characters.

Probably the best for my tastes would be: not to allow level-up during adventuring, and restrict characters "development" to the long downtime between adventuring (unless the adventures take months at least, here I'm thinking of typical adv of at most a few consecutive days).

Published adventures are often written to make the PC gain 1-2 levels in a few days, and therefore it's not always easy to do other that letting level-up in the middle of it.

 

[Hand of Evil]

I mix as it fits the skill, somethings you just get better at by doing but other stuff requires some training and interaction, now if another player character has the skill (at higher level) I will allow it, saying it was learned by working together.

 

[Greylock]

Lot's of really cool ideas in this thread. Old One's seem rather justified and fair. One thing that I completely fail to understand though, is this whole business of "downtime". What mean you all, "downtime"? And this concept of "days between adventures". That, too, goes swooosh right over my characters pointy little haid.

 

[diaglo]

guess my answer

 

[Hand of Evil]

Lot's of really cool ideas in this thread. Old One's seem rather justified and fair. One thing that I completely fail to understand though, is this whole business of "downtime". What mean you all, "downtime"? And this concept of "days between adventures". That, too, goes swooosh right over my characters pointy little haid.

Downtime is seen when the players are not adventuring but can be other periods.

 

[Greylock]

Downtime is seen when the players are not adventuring but can be other periods.

Sorry. Still don't get it. Can you spell that out for me in English, please?

"Not adventuring"?... Nope. Not in my dictionary.