Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="jgsugden" data-source="post: 8358421" data-attributes="member: 2629">#1: You're better off using Milestone advancement.&nbsp; If you don't like the rate of advancement created by using the RAW core system, you're wanting a change, and that change is motivated by a sense of where you want to go.&nbsp; Milestone advancement skips straight to that goal without unnecessary math.&nbsp; You don't need to tell the PCs you are using it, either.&nbsp; I have used a version of Milestone advancement since the 1980s when I realized that tracking experience for combats was a waste of my time, and often unsatisfying as the difficult of encounters did not match the rewards given.&nbsp; To that end, I would look at one PC, see how much they needed to level, and then award xp to the group based upon what percentage of the way I felt they deserved to reach after a session.&nbsp; Nobody realized I was not doing the math anymore - ever.&nbsp; And that is after running thousands of sessions.#2: Look at the design of 5E and you'll see something hidden in there: We do not have levels 12 through 20.&nbsp; At least, they are not levels like the earlier levels.&nbsp; Advancement is faster, but the abilities, and primarily magic abilities, are stretched out more.&nbsp; You get fewer spell slots per level.&nbsp; Fewer spells known for sorcerers.&nbsp; The secret is that it generally, but not always, takes more levels to get the same 'impact' on a PC that you felt for achieving a lower level.&nbsp; This is not true of all mechanics - but it is true of enough that you can see it if you play enough high level play.&nbsp; Don't feel bad if your PCs advance higher in levels between levels 12 and 20 because they're not really advancing as quickly in terms.&nbsp; I think of levels 12 to 20 in 5E as (12 to 14), (15 to 16), and (17 to 20) as three mini tiers that PCs advance through at about the same rate that they went from 10 to 11.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="jgsugden, post: 8358421, member: 2629"] #1: You're better off using Milestone advancement. If you don't like the rate of advancement created by using the RAW core system, you're wanting a change, and that change is motivated by a sense of where you want to go. Milestone advancement skips straight to that goal without unnecessary math. You don't need to tell the PCs you are using it, either. I have used a version of Milestone advancement since the 1980s when I realized that tracking experience for combats was a waste of my time, and often unsatisfying as the difficult of encounters did not match the rewards given. To that end, I would look at one PC, see how much they needed to level, and then award xp to the group based upon what percentage of the way I felt they deserved to reach after a session. Nobody realized I was not doing the math anymore - ever. And that is after running thousands of sessions. #2: Look at the design of 5E and you'll see something hidden in there: We do not have levels 12 through 20. At least, they are not levels like the earlier levels. Advancement is faster, but the abilities, and primarily magic abilities, are stretched out more. You get fewer spell slots per level. Fewer spells known for sorcerers. The secret is that it generally, but not always, takes more levels to get the same 'impact' on a PC that you felt for achieving a lower level. This is not true of all mechanics - but it is true of enough that you can see it if you play enough high level play. Don't feel bad if your PCs advance higher in levels between levels 12 and 20 because they're not really advancing as quickly in terms. I think of levels 12 to 20 in 5E as (12 to 14), (15 to 16), and (17 to 20) as three mini tiers that PCs advance through at about the same rate that they went from 10 to 11. [/QUOTE]

Verification