XP is way too high in 4th Edition!

[hawkwind7026]

I have been a d&d player since the 70's. I cannot believe the outragous XP that 4th edition gives to PC,s! Leveling up after only 8-10 encounters! Are you kidding me? I don't want Players leveling up after 50 encounters! I have alot of 1- 3rd level dungeons for my characters to explore. I cannot have them leveling up so fast. I am seriosly thinking of using 2nd edition xp for monsters. Is anyone else as upset as I am about this?

 

[TirionAnthion]

I am not really upset, but that is because I do not use experience for level advancement. I use experience to build the encounters but I level the characters when I feel it is appropriate for my story.

My current group prefers a fast progression so we have been moving along at a good clip. We average about 12 encounters per level, sometimes more and sometimes less. Ultimately, the DM controls the flow of XP, if you want to scale them back the do so. As long as everyone is having a good time, I don't think that it matters.

 

[the Jester]

The "10 encounters to level" paradigm came to be in 3e.

My personal preference is for slower advancement if I game every week. That said, I am eager to see the whole 1-30 arc for a 4e campaign so I haven't adjusted downward so far. But yes, I remember fondly the days of approximately 12 sessions per level. There was an old DM advice article in a 1e-era Dragon that suggested advancing pcs at the slowest rate that maintains interest in the game, and I think that is a fantastic approach; it gives the campaign a ton of depth developed over time.

But again, this is strictly a playstyle preference issue.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

I think it's a balance between the attention span/availability of your players and the length of your story arc. Strike whatever balance you need for your games.

I am fortunate that I've been with the same core group for something like 10 years, more for some of the players, but I gather that this is not the "norm."

For a lot of groups, even finding time to game weekly over the course of a year would be hard, and that's what, 50 sessions, if you're lucky, accounting for the odd cancellation. In fact, it's probably optimistic. So, you go 50 sessions, times three encounters per session, and you're at 150 over the course of a year. 50 encounters to the level puts you at... level 3? After a year.

Eh, it's a little slow for my liking, but if that works for your group... knock yourself out.

Then again, if my memory of those older editions serves, what constituted an 'encounter' took a lot less time to resolve. So, yeah, I guess if you wanted to plot it on a graph, one axis could be 'time available' and the other one could be story progress.

The other solution is, have players make new characters often and you can still get lots of mileage out of those low-level dungeons. Or repopulate some them with higher-level critters.

The main thing is that everyone is having fun.

 

[Mengu]

It's right there in the DMG pg 121. Feel free to halve the experience if you want slower advancement. You can also feel free to not give xp for the more trivial encounters. 2 orcs standing guard at the entrance to a dungeon might not necessarily be a challenge for 6 PC's to defeat. You can play it out to see if the PC's manage to kill them before an alarm is raised. And you can count it as an encounter for milestone purposes. But you could just ignore the xp for the two orcs.

Personally, I feel free to ignore all experience, and have my players level up depending on my campaign requirements.

Edit: Leveling up low level dungeons is a breeze in 4e. And character power rises in a much smoother fashion than older editions where there are big jumps like between level 4 and level 5. If I had to equate power levels, I'd say level 1-10 is the old levels 1-6, 11-20 is the old 7-13, and 21-30 is the old 14-20. So levels have been stretched out a bit.

 

[SoulsFury]

The group I DM (and sometimes play in) like to level fairly fast. This is an average of how it has gone:

Level 1-4: 1-2 sessions
5-8: 2-3 sessions
9-12: 3-4 sessions

We have two current games. I DM the main one and we just finished our second session for level 10. Looks like it will take two more to hit level 11. The other game, one of my players DMs. We just hit level 4. We also occasionally do one shot games. I ordered the Castle Ravenloft Boardgame so we are gonna give that a try as well. We play weekly, if that matters.

 

[Incenjucar]

It's really just a guideline. Keep in mind that there is a lot more readily-available, engaging entertainment available these days than back in the 70s (including RPGs), and many people want to experience as much of it as possible before they die, so chugging along in a single experience for a decade, even if it's good, is less appealing to many. Some groups find that 10 encounters/level is too SLOW. 4E also has 30 levels, rather than 20, and all of those levels are fully-functional and relatively easy to work with.

Ideally, you should fit the XP gain to the group and the narrative. 10 encounters is a good place to start. If it's too fast for your group, slow it down.

 

[Dice4Hire]

Suit advancement to the group's taste.

My group likes to go fast, so e level up quickly, and then go to another campaign. I cannot imagine playing in a game where it took a year of real time to level up. But it does sound interesting, just not for my group.

 

[GreyLord]

I have been a d&d player since the 70's. I cannot believe the outragous XP that 4th edition gives to PC,s! Leveling up after only 8-10 encounters! Are you kidding me? I don't want Players leveling up after 50 encounters! I have alot of 1- 3rd level dungeons for my characters to explore. I cannot have them leveling up so fast. I am seriosly thinking of using 2nd edition xp for monsters. Is anyone else as upset as I am about this?

You think that's fast...in 3e killing one orc would net you 150 XP, or almost 1/7 of the XP needed to get from level 1 to level 2 (1000 XP). A Large Skeleton would net you 300 XP. It had an AC of 13, and two attacks which were at +2.

If you want first level characters leveling slower in 4e however, I would suggest you use minions creatively. Skeleton minions can be as little as 25 XP, which is similar to what some monster XP that you would get in 2e. They can be killed in one blow (much like some 1st level monsters in 2e), but otherwise can be similar to the full thing in many ways. Pit them against a couple archers and other monsters to be creative and you can have challenging encounters without massive XP.

If you did old schooling DMing, you know how you did it in 2e to make combat dangerous and crazy even if the monsters could be killed with one or two blows. The same holds true for minions. Use them as needed to wear down the party...and then strike in for the kill. Just like 2e...or 1e if you desire.

 

[Dannager]

I'm not sure why this would make anyone upset. You're hardly straight-jacketed into sticking with their progression chart; changing the amount it takes to level changes absolutely nothing else, mechanics-wise, so as long as you're creating your own campaign it's not an issue.

So, I mean, it's easy to understand disagreeing with their progression chart. They based it on the idea that players will want to experience the full range of the game (and of their characters) over the course of a one year period of weekly games lasting a few hours apiece. I'm sure there are some people out there who want their campaign to last longer. I don't think that's the consensus, though. From my personal experience, the amount of time it takes for run a 1-30 campaign using the standard progression is more than enough.

This isn't really something to be upset over, is it?