When running adventures do you give out experience after each encounter or when they have a chance to rest?
Do you allow players to gain their new level abilities as soon as they gain a level?
For example the players have just defeated an encounter in room 4 of a 6 room adventure. Do you calculate the experience and hand it out then? If so and a player can go up a level do you allow them to immediately roll hit points, gain skill points, what about new spells?
I am just wondering what other people have tried and how it has worked for them.
|
I give experience out as it is earned, i.e. at the end of each encounter. I used to wait until they had "time to reflect" at the end of an adventure or similar pause, but it led to problems, especially where PCs were dying but hadn't got their xp. What level were they for resurrection purposes?
Also, it seems fairer to give it as it is earned, so they can gain some levels as an adventure could get progressively more dangerous. It can penalise some types of character (especially those casters that need to prepare spells ahead of time) but less, arguably, that not giving them the level (and hp, BAB and so on) at all.
I tend to use a system where the players gain their levels after a short pause to reflect. This is mainly a book keeping issue with me as opposed to a deep philosophical stance.
Essentially its easier to work out all the XP in a lump sum. Furthermore keeping track of things like wealth by level is part of my job as a DM. Checking in on this sort of thing at the beginning of each level just makes more sense and this is best done when the players are down for a short breather as opposed to 1 room away from a treasure bonanza the likes of which will shake the economies of the known world to its very foundations. In other words I want to be sure I'm reasonably close to the correct wealth by level guidelines after everything is said and done - that way I don't add more treasure to the next adventure accidentally.
well, for years I went by the first ed rules of training and training cost requiring players to return to some place with trainers; but, this wasted time needlessly sometimes having players wait 2 or 3 levels to get training and was a big hassle and frustrating for the players and myself as the gm; so now, I have for the last several years, just let the players immediantly level their characters on the spot when they have the appropriate amount of exps. game goes a lot smoother now. I give the daily fight and playing exps at the end of the game session and they are to have new character sheet copies for my by the next time we play.
I will let my players advance at the end of each game session.
That way there won't be a to long pause for editing characters (multiple times during the game).
Also player can edit there character before the next game starts.
They only have to show their changes and roll hitpoints.
Thats my favourite (rolling for hitpoints).
No #1 please.
*evil smile*
I used to do training, but as mentioned above, it becomes a real pain if you're on a multi-level-spanning adventure far from civilization. My players level as they earn xp--however, once they hit that magic number, they have to rest first (the normal 8 hour sleep period). At the beginning of each gaming session, I hand out an xp log that shows them where they are at. If they are getting close to the next level, I'll tell them that night to have their next level character sheets ready for the next session--that gives them a week to work on them, and prevents us taking a couple of hours out of the session for everyone to level up.
--Fang
|
I used to give out XP after each encounter and this worked fine until the PCs were at different levels due to dying etc. .
When the PCs are not all advancing at once it really slows down the game and the players of characters that are not advancing are getting bored, because the advancing players cannot decide which feats to take, which skills to up and such.
This could happen several times during a gaming session and some of my players are not that fast when it comes to decisions like this... :).
When this got more and more annoying I began giving out XP whenever it seemed appropriate to do so (like when the characters are resting etc.).
I give out XP at least once during each session and I'm quiet pleased with this method.
I give XP at the end of the session, or sometimes at a convenient mid-point (if we're involved in a very long session). Characters level as soon as they have enough XP.
I hand out xp at the end of the session, or if they have just wrapped up the end of an adventure.
I do this to reduce the amount of time spent on advancement.
I give out xp at the end of the session, if giving xp is warranted at all - we had sessions that gave no xp. Leveling usually happens then as well, but I want to have control about when my PCs level to fit this to my campaign, so I fit the xp given to my campaigns needs.
Stefan
I used to give XP continously, and level immediately. You gained you new HP, and got all feats and such. Sorcerors just gained new slots, wizards could do the 15-minute late-day spell slot fill. Clerics came up a bit short, though,s ince they prepare daily.
However, now that I pretty much exclusively run APs (when I have time to DM anything at all) I am considering going to an XP-less system (which fits better for OGL, since WotC won't let anyone talk of XP) of levelling at plot points so that the players always match the published adventure level.
I give out XP at the end of a session or when the party beds down for the night, whichever comes first. They only "level-up" when they've rested, so if the party is going to camp mid-session, then they need to know their XP then. But if not, then it's just more convenient for me to give it out at the end of the night. That way, I don't have to stop the game to calculate, and I don't have to worry about forgetting what was done during a previous session.
Greg
I usually give out xp after each encounter. If they level in the middle of a dungeon or something, they get hit points and any BaB or save increases right then and there. Spells and skill points come after a nights rest.
I used to do training, but as mentioned above, it becomes a real pain if you're on a multi-level-spanning adventure far from civilization. My players level as they earn xp--however, once they hit that magic number, they have to rest first (the normal 8 hour sleep period). At the beginning of each gaming session, I hand out an xp log that shows them where they are at. If they are getting close to the next level, I'll tell them that night to have their next level character sheets ready for the next session--that gives them a week to work on them, and prevents us taking a couple of hours out of the session for everyone to level up.
--Fang
I still have my player's characters get training, although there are provisions for training yourself (though it takes longer that way). One thing that I found works if you want to maintain the idea of training, mentors, etc. but you want to use multi level spanning adventures, especially ones that are "time sensitive" is to allow characters to "pre train" for the level spread likely to come up in the adventure.
So for example, before going into COTSQ for example, which has a spread of 10-18 level, the characters take nearly a year off, paying trainers, learning exotic secrets that they can't quite use yet, and then as soon as you are ready, you can let them gain levels and the like in the adventure, and after things can go back to "normal."
I also let characters pre train if one character in the group gets a level before the rest, so that everyone is ready to go at the same time, and you have less time off because of those that are ahead or behind the rest of the party.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
I find the discussion regarding no XP intriguing. The idea of leveling at strategic points has been bandied about before.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't XP closed game content? I wonder if Paizo has considered moving to a plot-based leveling approach to their APs and GameMastery line?
What do others think of this? Sure sure, we all grew up with XP, and it's kind of a staple of D&D, but what about this new approach?
|
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
However, now that I pretty much exclusively run APs (when I have time to DM anything at all) I am considering going to an XP-less system (which fits better for OGL, since WotC won't let anyone talk of XP) of levelling at plot points so that the players always match the published adventure level.
So what do you do about crafting or magic effects that cost XP?
|
|
I wonder if Paizo has considered moving to a plot-based leveling approach to their APs and GameMastery line?
What do others think of this? Sure sure, we all grew up with XP, and it's kind of a staple of D&D, but what about this new approach?
I think the largest obstacle (and it's really not all that large) would be developing alternatives for item creation and spells with an XP component.
EDIT: Beaten to the punch. Takes to long to type at work, having to minimize the screen every 10 seconds.
|
|
I give out XP at the conclusion of an "Act". I don't bother with calculating xp/kill. If they need to be midway through a level by a certain act, I give enough xp for it to be so. It works for us. The players aren't focusing on encounters so much as moving the story forawrd. With 3rd edition very encounter-centric, this method helps add a level of roleplaying.
I don't worry about raise dead/resurrection issues as much. If they have the means (money, spell access, etc) then it happens. I us e the "semi-permanent" negative level option for raise dead rather than a level loss anyway, so that helps. (You gain a *special* negative level that persists until you earn xp equal to your current level*1000. There is no other way to remove it).
By actually giving xp (rather than saying "ding, you level") the item creation part isn't problematic at all.
By making XP less important, and achieving story goals more important, the players are more focused on the story and the details provided. Its not for everyone. If you play a table-top minatures skirmish game with little thought to story, this method isn't for you. For the Adventure Paths, this method works great. You know they need to be a certain level by various specific points. You don't need to adjust encounters due to too many/few players, etc. in order to provide enough xp (you may need to adjust to provide a challenge...)
However, now that I pretty much exclusively run APs (when I have time to DM anything at all) I am considering going to an XP-less system (which fits better for OGL, since WotC won't let anyone talk of XP) of levelling at plot points so that the players always match the published adventure level.So what do you do about crafting or magic effects that cost XP?
Well, if you go with a "story approach" anyway, you could handle these xp costs in terms of the story as well. So, the PCs don´t have unlimited time/materials etc. to do things that would cost them xp.
You could also say that the character has the equivalent of (level-1) x 1.000 xp to spend on spells and items. That may raise game balance issues, but if you limit the production of items somehow (within the story), it should not pose much of problem.
Stefan
|
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
I think limiting the production of magic items is a good thing, at least for my games. I tend to run a lower magic campaign anyway.
I hate the Magic Items R' Us approach to D&D. Magical items should be special.
Limiting the XP (or its equivalent) would limit the number and type of magic items that can be created. Thus, the party mage isn't nearly as likely to become a factory for producing lower level magical items for the rest of the party. (i.e., they aren't going to want to burn their valuable XP trove to make bracers of armor for everyone, for example.)
I just think things get out of hand with the current XP system (or at least, they can get out of hand). So, some balance would need to be achieved of course so that players don't feel screwed, but that also eliminates the more munchkiny aspects of the game.
|
|
I think limiting the production of magic items is a good thing, at least for my games. I tend to run a lower magic campaign anyway.
I hate the Magic Items R' Us approach to D&D. Magical items should be special.
Limiting the XP (or its equivalent) would limit the number and type of magic items that can be created. Thus, the party mage isn't nearly as likely to become a factory for producing lower level magical items for the rest of the party. (i.e., they aren't going to want to burn their valuable XP trove to make bracers of armor for everyone, for example.)
I just think things get out of hand with the current XP system (or at least, they can get out of hand). So, some balance would need to be achieved of course so that players don't feel screwed, but that also eliminates the more munchkiny aspects of the game.
What about spells with XP cost?
|
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
Actually, something just clicked in my mind:
WotC said WHAT? "XP" is their property? Please tell me I'm just reading this wrong.
Yep, that's what I thought (check out my earlier post).
Another reason why it's a good idea to at least toss out and explore alternative means for leveling up besides XP.
EDIT: At least, I think that's what I've come across before - that WotC has claimed XP as their intellectual property.
I've always given experience after each session, with the prereq for leveling up being that the party isn't in the middle of something. if they're able to rest or get down time afterwards, then they can level up.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
I've always given experience after each session, with the prereq for leveling up being that the party isn't in the middle of something. if they're able to rest or get down time afterwards, then they can level up.
Yeah, I do this as well. Experience comes when the characters get a chance to rest. This eliminates a lot of awkwardness when spellcasters gain new slots but cannot memorize anything to them yet. I guess it doesn't really affect spontaneous casters much but, eh, I think it's just easier this way.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I play strictly by the book - the players are allowed to level once I receive their application for increase in character level, processing fee ($50, plus a $10 surcharge for multi-classing), and the appropriate documents are filed (amended and restated character sheet, equipment audit, balance sheet of treasure showing depreciation of wands, scrolls, and potions).
Sheesh. Doesn't anyone follow the rules anymore?
Sheesh. Doesn't anyone follow the rules anymore?
probably just you. and the vogons. ;)
|
I ran through SCAP using a level-less system and it worked our really well for me, when there was a death in the party I would drop the character behind a level and then over the next few levels slowly let them catch up, though it was essentially DM's fiat how quickly that happened.
Now I am running Drow War by Mongoose Publishing, and I have switched back to the XP based system, however I have been trying to keep my players on an even level so I have instituted two house rules. The first is that I have given our item crafters a pool that works much like an artificers(though smaller) for them to make items as well as cast xp costing spells from. The second house rule is that permenant level loss instead results in a negative level that lasts until they have gained half the XP that would be required for them to advance from the current level(the full amount rather then just half the amount they currently need. e.g. A third level player who died and was raised would have a negative level until he gained 1500xp from the point he died, whether he had just turned 3rd level or was nearly 4th).
Having tried both these tactics I think that I will likely institute a combination of them on the next adventure path I run, advancing the players as I see fit and feel the need for in the story while using the negative levels and xp pool to keep item creation in effect and still have a penalty for deaths.
Actually, something just clicked in my mind:
WotC said WHAT? "XP" is their property? Please tell me I'm just reading this wrong.
Yep, that's what I thought (check out my earlier post).
Another reason why it's a good idea to at least toss out and explore alternative means for leveling up besides XP.
EDIT: At least, I think that's what I've come across before - that WotC has claimed XP as their intellectual property.
Not exactly - they have not made the particular algorithm used to calculate XP in 3.5 open content. In other words if you print that algorythm for a fantasy RPG you'd probably be in violation of WotC copyright.
I give out exp. capriciously and at my own whim. I take bribes of cash for exp. as well as whiskey. I like my whiskey.
I am also capricious when I let players level up. Usually when the PCs are resting. That way spell casters can memorize or prepare new spells after leveling up.
Really it depends on the flow of the game. If I do not want my PCs to level up, then I will not give out exp. I try to award PCs when all can level up simultaniously. I will also ussually wait until some goal are challenge is accomplished by PCs before awarding exp. I have little flash cards for all characters in the game. I track exp on these cards until I award the Players with exp.
I keep track of my players XP in my ice age campaign and let them level up once they reach a location where they can rest. I have let players level up on the fly when they perform special deeds or meet special requirements that I have woven into an adventure though. I tend to plan my campaign in chunks that allow players to level up at particular locations, but sometimes that does mean players are up a level for a few game sessions and can't train because they can't rest. It's seldom enough that it has never proven frustrating though.
In my Cthulhu campaign I let players level up at the end of each adventure. XP is not important. They level up when I want them to.