XP progression: too fast, too slow, or just right?
- Thread starter Hairfoot
- Start date
The Thayan Menace
First Post
Rapid XP: Can't Touch This!
-MC Asad
This is more of a "downtime" issue than an XP concern. I use a version of episodic format to mitigate this.Hairfoot said:
The rules already promote downtime with item creation dynamics. Unfortunately, many campaigns (e.g., City of the Spider Queen) possess an urgent and/or apocalyptic tone ... which discourages PCs from taking Item Creation feats.Hairfoot said:
-MC Asad
We ignore XP and level up characters when the time seems right. Some of our campaigns have called for rapid advancement as the PCs grow from 1st level to become kings and great champions. More typically our PCs are perpetually 5th level.
The XP advancement tables in the books are a great starting point for a group of people that have never played before. Once you get a feel for the game you should feel free to experiment with your own rules.
The XP advancement tables in the books are a great starting point for a group of people that have never played before. Once you get a feel for the game you should feel free to experiment with your own rules.
Nonlethal Force
First Post
I took this question to mean two different things, but answered too fast on both accounts.
First: Do the players level to often in terms of RL time. This is largely dependant upon the game. People that play for one weekend (48 hours straight) every other month might say they level too quickly. Those who play weekly but only a few hours per session are more likely to say that it feels fine. However, I think this is much more a group dynamic perception.
Second: From a game mechanic perspective - is it right that the party levels after an average of 13 1/3 encounters. From this perspective I think the rate of advancement is absurd. To think that a person go into 13 1/3 combats and gain a level is rediculous in RL standards. For extended campaigns, it is precisely this fact that makes the orcs at level 1 seem so rediculously simple. After only 30 - 40 encounters orcs are just a non-issue unless they are classed.
For this reason, I am glad that in RL we advance when it feels appreopriate - not when the book says that you've "done enough." That's the way I'd rather have it.
The flip-side to this is the fact that we live in a disposable culture. When something is worn-out, broken, or just "not fun" any more we tend to toss it away. Thus, to keep us interested as a culture we must advance quickly because to not advance quickly would run the risk of 'reducing the fun' for most in our culture. I don't buy into that perception personally, but I know many do. The fun is getting to be omnipotent in totay's disposable culture. More often than not, the fun isn't in telling the story as much. It's in creating the ultimate character.
First: Do the players level to often in terms of RL time. This is largely dependant upon the game. People that play for one weekend (48 hours straight) every other month might say they level too quickly. Those who play weekly but only a few hours per session are more likely to say that it feels fine. However, I think this is much more a group dynamic perception.
Second: From a game mechanic perspective - is it right that the party levels after an average of 13 1/3 encounters. From this perspective I think the rate of advancement is absurd. To think that a person go into 13 1/3 combats and gain a level is rediculous in RL standards. For extended campaigns, it is precisely this fact that makes the orcs at level 1 seem so rediculously simple. After only 30 - 40 encounters orcs are just a non-issue unless they are classed.
For this reason, I am glad that in RL we advance when it feels appreopriate - not when the book says that you've "done enough." That's the way I'd rather have it.
The flip-side to this is the fact that we live in a disposable culture. When something is worn-out, broken, or just "not fun" any more we tend to toss it away. Thus, to keep us interested as a culture we must advance quickly because to not advance quickly would run the risk of 'reducing the fun' for most in our culture. I don't buy into that perception personally, but I know many do. The fun is getting to be omnipotent in totay's disposable culture. More often than not, the fun isn't in telling the story as much. It's in creating the ultimate character.
Olgar Shiverstone
Legend
Somewhat too fast. We've slowed XP award in the games I've played in, under multiple DMs, to spend more time in the "sweet spot" -- typically using 50-75% of the published rate.
I voted "just right", but not because it is exactly right for every game I run.
Instead, I think it is just right because the rate is so easily adjusted. I have never had a problem with getting XP rates to fall just about where I want them, and what adjustment I need to do seems quick and easy to me, so I call the system a success in that regard.
Instead, I think it is just right because the rate is so easily adjusted. I have never had a problem with getting XP rates to fall just about where I want them, and what adjustment I need to do seems quick and easy to me, so I call the system a success in that regard.
Olaf the Stout
Hero
The 20th Level teenager is what I hate about the levelling in 3.x Edition. Sure you can extend things out over years if you want to but some adventures have very pressing timelines that don't let you do this. Take the Shackled City AP as an example. There should be some way that you can run these adventures without ending up with epic level children. I haven't figured out how as yet though.
Olaf the Stout
Olaf the Stout
Olgar Shiverstone
Legend
Start your characters older. Why do they have to be teenagers at 1st level?
Similar Threads
