The talismanic lure of high levels

[S'mon]

The problem I see with this is how do you cut all treasure in half? How do you divide a +1 or even a +2 longsword, for example?

If I only award half the XP but keep treasure as typed (in most published modules), what kind of trouble can I expect?

A +2 longsword is worth roughly 8000gp, so replace it with an item worth 4000gp. Or just randomly remove 50% of the magic items. Or do what I do - I don't worry about it, I just don't hand out magic items or treasure after many fights. If you strictly enforce the items-sold-for-50%-value rule and have some training etc costs, maybe some taxes, you'll end up with about the right result anyway. I wouldn't bother slasing individual treasure hoards, just give out half XP, sometimes "forget" to give monetary awards, and eyeball party wealth to see that it stays roughly in the right ballpark.

 

[Frostmarrow]

A +2 longsword is worth roughly 8000gp, so replace it with an item worth 4000gp. Or just randomly remove 50% of the magic items. Or do what I do - I don't worry about it, I just don't hand out magic items or treasure after many fights. If you strictly enforce the items-sold-for-50%-value rule and have some training etc costs, maybe some taxes, you'll end up with about the right result anyway. I wouldn't bother slasing individual treasure hoards, just give out half XP, sometimes "forget" to give monetary awards, and eyeball party wealth to see that it stays roughly in the right ballpark.

I've come to the conclusion that it is not necessary to halve treasure. Sure the characters becomes a wee bit richer but then they can affored to squander some too. They still can't afford better things, they can only buy more items of the same power level.

(Like hell, I would sit and replace 8000 gp worth of longsword with 4000 gp worth of something else. I wan't to run the module as is. )

 

[S'mon]

I've come to the conclusion that it is not necessary to halve treasure. Sure the characters becomes a wee bit richer but then they can affored to squander some too. They still can't afford better things, they can only buy more items of the same power level.

Yeah, even with double the standard wealth I doubt the PC's ECL goes up by more than 1, so published adventures should still be runnable - if anything they'll be a bit tougher towards the end, since longer modules these days assume levelling-up within the module.

 

[Frostmarrow]

Yeah, even with double the standard wealth I doubt the PC's ECL goes up by more than 1, so published adventures should still be runnable - if anything they'll be a bit tougher towards the end, since longer modules these days assume levelling-up within the module.

Exactly. -Good point about longer modules, there.

 

[milotha]

To me, it's all relative. The D&D world does scale with PC level.

When PCs are low level, they are confronted by the appropriate CR challenges. When the PCs are high levels they are confronted by CR appropriate challenges. These are different challenges.

Suppose you have a road in your campaign with some monster encounters to add some combat into the game. You want the players to be challenged by say on average 1 encounter as they travel down the road.

The levels of the world slide example:

A 1st level party will encounter some orcs, a 5th level party encounters some trolls, a 10th level party encounters a fire giant, a 15th party encounters a 15th level kobold sorcerer, and a 20th level party encounters a hungry old red dragon.

The levels of the world stay fixed example.

The party encounters some orcs: The first level party is challenged. 5th and up- easy. Would this even be worth mentioning to a 20th level party?
The party encounters an old red dragon: The 1st and 5th level party are toast combat wise. I'm sorry you guys freshly rolled up characters just died, but there was a dragon on this road, and hey you looked like a snack. I'm guessing that most people would call this bad GMing.

Does any GM really design up a single level independent adventure. Is this realistic -no, but neither is ANYTHING really realistic about D&D. That's the fun of it.

 

[S'mon]

Ouch - I hate that example. In my game:

At level 1, the road has orcs. These pose a tough fight to the PCs.
At level 5, the road has orcs. Maybe a few more orcs now (unless the PCs wiped them out at level 1). This is an easy fight to the PCs.
At level 10, the road has orcs. These are passed over with a "encountering and dispatching a few orc brigands along the way, you arrive at..."
At level 13+ the PCs are Greater Teleporting anyway, so it doesn't matter what the road has.

Meanwhile the CR 20 red dragon lives atop the Ineffable Mountain of Doom in the faraway land of the Dragonsblood Peaks. If he doesn't - eg if he enters the PCs' home turf - it's a scenario in itself.

 

[mhensley]

Its interesting that this topic has come up because I have been planning that my next campaign will be capped at 10th level and XP will be halved. Why? Simple. Low level modules have always been my favorite and I would like to get more use out of them. Also, low levels match my comfort zone as a dm due to the rapid increase of complexity that comes with higher level play. Going up in levels is overrated anyway. So you're tougher now. So are the monsters. You really haven't gained much.

I like the idea that I won't necessarily have to half the amounts of treasure as well. Thats makes running modules much easier.

 

[milotha]

Ouch - I hate that example. In my game:

At level 1, the road has orcs. These pose a tough fight to the PCs.
At level 5, the road has orcs. Maybe a few more orcs now (unless the PCs wiped them out at level 1). This is an easy fight to the PCs.
At level 10, the road has orcs. These are passed over with a "encountering and dispatching a few orc brigands along the way, you arrive at..."
At level 13+ the PCs are Greater Teleporting anyway, so it doesn't matter what the road has.

Meanwhile the CR 20 red dragon lives atop the Ineffable Mountain of Doom in the faraway land of the Dragonsblood Peaks. If he doesn't - eg if he enters the PCs' home turf - it's a scenario in itself.

Let me put it more simply. Suppose that you are running a campaign, and for whatever reason, you decide to run a module. Are you going to pick a 20th levelmodule to run against a 1st level party? Are you going to pick a 1st level module to run against a 20th level party. The D&D world scales because the GM scales it. If they didn't they would be a bad GM.

edit: Note I originally meant to post this in another thread.

 

[Frostmarrow]

Its interesting that this topic has come up because I have been planning that my next campaign will be capped at 10th level and XP will be halved. Why? Simple. Low level modules have always been my favorite and I would like to get more use out of them. Also, low levels match my comfort zone as a dm due to the rapid increase of complexity that comes with higher level play. Going up in levels is overrated anyway. So you're tougher now. So are the monsters. You really haven't gained much.

I like the idea that I won't necessarily have to half the amounts of treasure as well. Thats makes running modules much easier.

-Glad to have helped. You know, with more encounters comes more opportuinties to waste gold as well. With all those scrolls, potions, alchemical items and stuff. Moreover, with a bit more cash the players can still "level up" as they go by trading and buying new items. (Players love this - even if it's "low-magic".)

The nice thing about this is that you actually have a chance to get to know your character before you level up and all options have changed. (Especially if it's a new spell level you've reached).

 

[mhensley]

The nice thing about this is that you actually have a chance to get to know your character before you level up and all options have changed. (Especially if it's a new spell level you've reached).

Yep, I know what you mean. The last campaign I played in, we leveled up about ever other session. This was just too fast for my taste.