D&D 5E Training to Level Up

[Snoring Rock]

This has been an age-old question. Back when I cut my teeth on Holmes edition Basic and AD&D, training to level up was mentioned in the PHB, but no real system or cost was in place. I have given this a lot of thought over the years.

A rogue (thief) to me; seems like there is no need to for training in the academic sense. School of hard knocks works just fine. A paladin, cleric, fighter, needs training, but what if the party is in a deep mega dungeon where there is no training center? Certainly, you do not tell your PCs that they cannot level up, do you? The party just finished a dungeon, they have loot, they have blood on their hands and they are ready to power up and then get to town (population 56) to find that the highest level fighter there is 3rd. Seems to me that the trainer must be higher level than the trainee. All problems.

Then you must ask, how much? How much does it cost to train from one level to another? Is "level" just a game term? Is that used "in-game?" I like to take gold from my players on a regular basis. Wear and tear on items causes them to need repair or replacement. I require new swords to come with a 50gp training on use, or a set of thieves tools come with a 100gp extra pick or something like that.

I expect the wizards and other casters to study, search and join schools, covens, and guilds in order to pay dues and thus be training all the time. That way when the time comes, they just level up.


How do you do this in your campaign? What about the mega-dungeon scenario? Do you make them leave the dungeon to go get trained?

 

[Caliban]

In every edition, every group I've played with has ignored training times and costs. You get XP, you level - sometimes a long rest is required to gain the benefits of the new level but that's it. It falls under "acceptable breaks from reality".

 

[delericho]

In every edition, every group I've played with has ignored training times and costs. You get XP, you level - sometimes a long rest is required to gain the benefits of the new level but that's it. It falls under "acceptable breaks from reality".

Yep, this.

 

[Raith5]

In all campaigns (except my first 1e campaign), we have levelled up after a rest. We all accept that the PCs have been learning on the job!

 

[akr71]

I insist on the party completing a long rest before leveling up. Though I was pretty lax in chapter 1 of HoTDQ - levels 1-3 go by so quickly anyway and the pace of that first chapter is intense, I let them level up with a short rest.

Its just my 2 cp, but I think it helps keep the attention of video game players to allow easier leveling and healing.

 

[iserith]

Since experience points represent experience in adventuring, I think the adventuring on its own is sufficient "on-the-job" training and no additional time need be set aside for advancement in level. When I use standard experience point awards in D&D 5e, I dole them out as we play (typically after each scene) and the PCs level up immediately upon achieving the required amount for the next level. No resting or separate training is required. Players are free to establish how and why they now have a new class feature, spell, or the like if they wish.

 

[Gardens & Goblins]

We encourage players to set aside some time each day/every so often where their characters can be said to be training, be it studying in their quarters, sparring with a comrade, composing a witty ditty in the mess hall etc.

The idea being that when their characters do level, it can represent both their development in face of dramatic events and a continuous process of personal improvement.

 

[Rhenny]

Like others, most of my campaigns assume "on the job training." That said, there are campaigns that work if formal training is required, but here are some considerations:

1) It is a drag to play a PC who has the potential to level up, but has to wait for time and personnel to train; therefore in campaigns that require training, pcs should always be near some type of civilized "hub".

2) Since 5e has less opportunity to spend cash (no buying magic, etc in default setting) training would give pcs ways to use earned treasure.

3) Campaigns that force PCs to move fast to stop evil plots are not conducive to training requirements. For example, in Princes of the Apocalypse, if the PCs take longer breaks, the cults have more time to destroy and call forth their respective deities. Story-wise it just doesn't make sense that pcs would take time to train when they know that the entire adventure is a race against time.

 

[Jester David]

Every level is likely too much. Key levels work. When picking a subclass and maybe every 4 or 5 levels after. Or when training into a new class.
Training should be fairly cheap. 10gp per level would be a lot, especially at low levels. Maybe 5 gp/level at level 3, 10 gp/level after that, and maybe 20 or 100 gp/ level after level 10.

 

[collin]

Since experience points represent experience in adventuring, I think the adventuring on its own is sufficient "on-the-job" training and no additional time need be set aside for advancement in level. When I use standard experience point awards in D&D 5e, I dole them out as we play (typically after each scene) and the PCs level up immediately upon achieving the required amount for the next level. No resting or separate training is required. Players are free to establish how and why they now have a new class feature, spell, or the like if they wish.

We have generally abided by this rule since D&D 3.0. You get better at being a fighter by fighting things; you get better at being a thief by stealing (whether you are successful or not - you learn by mistakes, too). The only area that makes this logic fall apart in my mind is for spell-casters. We have not required magic-users of any sort to train, but in seems to me they should require some form of education before learning new spells, but then you are laying a set of requirements on them that you don't for other classes. Maybe that is okay since spell-casters are typically regarded as more powerful than straight fighters. I don't think either training or no training is wrong or right, it's all in how everyone agrees to deal with leveling up.