D&D 5E No One Plays High Level?

[MGibster]

Does anyone really like keeping track of experience points? It's been many, many years since I've done that. I just level up the party when I feel like it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Does anyone really like keeping track of experience points? It's been many, many years since I've done that. I just level up the party when I feel like it.

I don't like milestone. It to me removes from the PCs a sense of accomplishment as well as agency, as all they really have to do is last long enough for the GM to decide they've crossed some arbitrary line in their head.

 

[Reynard]

Does anyone really like keeping track of experience points? It's been many, many years since I've done that. I just level up the party when I feel like it.

I do. XP is a measure of the players' choices in the context of what they decide to take on. I will use milestone xp if I am running a linear game like most of. WotC's modules, but if the players are in charge I want to track XP.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I don't like milestone. It to me removes from the PCs a sense of accomplishment as well as agency, as all they really have to do is last long enough for the GM to decide they've crossed some arbitrary line in their head.

Given how vague the guidelines for non-combat XP are it isn't much more arbitrary than using the XP.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Given how vague the guidelines for non-combat XP are it isn't much more arbitrary than using the XP.

Its still based on the PCs actions, and not the DMs. In any case, those guidelines can and should be tightened up.

 

[Minigiant]

Does anyone really like keeping track of experience points? It's been many, many years since I've done that. I just level up the party when I feel like it.

I prefer milestone. But XP is better if you have a larger party or want to encourage individual achievements.

Or you give the people an XP bonus for being weaker or a malus for a bonus. Like if your character turns into a vampire, you get vampire powers but -10% XP.

 

[payn]

I don't like milestone. It to me removes from the PCs a sense of accomplishment as well as agency, as all they really have to do is last long enough for the GM to decide they've crossed some arbitrary line in their head.

As a milestone GM, its anything but arbitrary. Goals are set and the players always have a vague idea of how to achieve it.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Hence fighting them directly is a bad idea.

Which makes them bad combat encounters for party of that level!

That's not, to me, a good enough reason for them not to be there.

They of course can exist in the world, but tackling these foes as a first level party would be unwise.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Which makes them bad combat encounters for party of that level!


They of course can exist in the world, but tackling these foes as a first level party would be unwise.

Then the first level party can choose not to engage them in combat.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Then the first level party can choose not to engage them in combat.

Yes. But the context was combat encounters needed to gain enough XP to reach the second level so that entails fighting them.