Eberron Experience [Archive] - Wizards Community

Eberron Experience [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Zmaj
01-31-05, 12:51 PM Forgive me if this has already been addressed, the search is down and I'm lucky to get 15 mins or so a week on a networked PC.

Just to toss this out, some of my battle buddies and I play in Eberron when we have off duty hours. As GM I set up a house rule for experience to keep the flavor of low levels being the norm. I ruled that low levels 1-5 earn normal XP, mid 6-10 earn 75% normal, high 11-15 earn 50% normal, and very high only earns 25%. Those over 21 have never been seen on Eberron, but if my players managed to be the first I'd probably shoot it down to 10%.

It's worked out well so far, it really slows down the leveling but it tends to draw out the lower and mid levels where my players have the most fun. High level magic is so hard to find because while magic is extreamly common, there is only so much magic and when it's used so much for the low level spells it's harder to find power for the high level spells. Harder to research them because they fail so much more and are tossed aside as impossible.

Just wondering what you all thought.
fizzbang
01-31-05, 01:20 PM Yowza. I can certainly understand your reasoning behind that decision, but I don't think it'd detract from the Eberron Experience (tm) to keep with the standard speed for PC level progression. The feeling that the players are the major figures in the setting is just as important as the fact that most people have low levels. That's the pulp influence there: the players are the characters with amazing potential, and they're the heroes that'll make the difference in the next major threat that faces the city/country/world.

I worry that slowing down the progression of characters would begin to make the players feel like they're never making progress. I'd also worry that slowing their level progression without slowing their wealth accumulation might throw off some of the expected balance, but that's separate. I've been playing at standard progression speed, and it hasn't ruined the game for me.

Of course it all comes down to this: If your players are happy and you're happy, then everything's fine.
Streamweaver
01-31-05, 01:23 PM I don't see a problem with that. I actually use a flat 50% experience cut in my current campaign. I try to compensate by doing a lot of work to keep the sessions interesting. They encounter new things and situations all the time, are able to advance opportunities if not character levels fairly often.

Been running for about 2 months now and players just love it.
Golbez57
01-31-05, 01:24 PM If it works for you and your players, go for it!

If ALL of you do sincerely enjoy the low- and mid-levels more than the later levels, rather than tweaking XP, I'd simply start with new characters once they start to push up against the point when the options and actions seem too wide open. You don't have to have their characters truly "end", as that's kind of a poor payoff for the time and energy invested in breathing life into them on the part of you and your players. Perhaps their 12th level characters become the patrons of their new 1st level characters, or are tied into your new adventures in some other significant way. New characters does not necessarily equate to a new campaign.
hiryuu
01-31-05, 01:31 PM I usually ignore experience and hand out levels.

It works like this: the PCs investigate things, that's part of what they do. PCs stick their noses into places, mess with things they shouldn't, and spend extensive time building contacts, getting contracts, and in general just futzing around. Every so often, I nearly kill them, take them down to an inch of their life or so, and when I dod it three or four times, I give them a level. It works out fine for the most part (and honestly, before the artificer, the magic item creation's never come up).
fizzbang
01-31-05, 02:10 PM If it works for you and your players, go for it!

If ALL of you do sincerely enjoy the low- and mid-levels more than the later levels, rather than tweaking XP, I'd simply start with new characters once they start to push up against the point when the options and actions seem too wide open. You don't have to have their characters truly "end", as that's kind of a poor payoff for the time and energy invested in breathing life into them on the part of you and your players. Perhaps their 12th level characters become the patrons of their new 1st level characters, or are tied into your new adventures in some other significant way. New characters does not necessarily equate to a new campaign.

This is an excellent, and oft-forgotten technique. It also really allows you to create a dynasty of characters, complete with interesting re-envisionings of similar character concepts or interesting foils for older characters. And it lets the DM work with much longer-term intrigues, not to mention having a set of well-known and well-made NPCs ready-made for the games!
Edymnion
01-31-05, 03:04 PM I really like generational games myself.

To use a... less than well loved... example (assuming you enjoy anime) is to look at the entire span of the Dragonball series. It starts off a lot like a D&D game in terms of power level. Goku is a young boy, a monk, Bulma is an artificer, etc.

They go on a big long quest to gather the Dragonballs to make a wish. The entire first season is nothing but the quest to find the Dragonballs. Then, as the original Dragonball series progressed through the seasons, Goku grew into a teen, he fell in love with one of the female characters.

Dragonball Z rolls around, and Goku is now a full grown man, with a young son. As DBZ goes through, we follow not only Goku, but his son Gohan learning how to fight, and a new campaign unfolding that takes them to another planet to fight a new BBEG and his lackies. After a few more things, it fast forwards again, now Goku has another son, Goten, and one of the villians from the last campaign is now a trusted friend. Vegita, the old enemy, has also married one of the original characters and has a son named Trunks. It now focuses as much around these new children as it does the old heroes. Gohan is now a teen, and has a love interest.

Dragonball GT is aired, and now most of the original characters have grown much older. Gohan and the love interest before are now married, and have a child of their own, named Pan. The show now focuses almost exclusively on Goku (who was turned into a child again by an abberant wish), Trunks, and Goku's granddaughter Pan.

And, at the end of GT, it fast fowards again. Pan, who was a pre-teen before is now an elderly grandmother, watching her grandson compete in a martial arts competition against the great great grandson of Vegita. The old guard is completely gone now, but their children's children carry the story onwards.

New adventures always around the next corner, if not for the original characters, than for their friends, and their children. As often as people badmouth Dragonball, its quite rare that you actually see a show that covers a good hundred years of story that tracks not one, not two, but three generations of characters, with a glimpse at the end into yet another generation.

Its a great story not because of the endless fight scenes, but in how the characters develop and change over time, and how all of the new things tie into what has come before. Its the same world, but with many differant campaigns (or Sagas, if you want to go by the DB conventions).

A persistant world can be one of the most fun to play in :)
Gurv
01-31-05, 03:24 PM Generation games work best when the older characters are retired at a middle level, which makes them perfect in the sense mentioned above. I caution against playing the offspring of truely high level characters, unless the DM has some serious plans for explaining why 'dad' can't solve problems for the PC. Just watch that you don't unwittingly ruin the lack of high level NPCs around to save the day.

I wouldn't go so far as to actually lower the XP rewards earned by a percentage. Give less XP, make them work for it. But reducing it by a percentage is almost like saying "Well, you earned more, but my houserules says you don't get it." That just rubs me the wrong way.

I just look at the table in the DMG, find the amount that a PC should gain for an equal level encounter, and divide that by four (the number of party members the table is based on). Then I give that amount for every 20% of a character's resources that an encounter consumes.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Zmaj 01-31-05, 12:51 PM	Forgive me if this has already been addressed, the search is down and I'm lucky to get 15 mins or so a week on a networked PC. Just to toss this out, some of my battle buddies and I play in Eberron when we have off duty hours. As GM I set up a house rule for experience to keep the flavor of low levels being the norm. I ruled that low levels 1-5 earn normal XP, mid 6-10 earn 75% normal, high 11-15 earn 50% normal, and very high only earns 25%. Those over 21 have never been seen on Eberron, but if my players managed to be the first I'd probably shoot it down to 10%. It's worked out well so far, it really slows down the leveling but it tends to draw out the lower and mid levels where my players have the most fun. High level magic is so hard to find because while magic is extreamly common, there is only so much magic and when it's used so much for the low level spells it's harder to find power for the high level spells. Harder to research them because they fail so much more and are tossed aside as impossible. Just wondering what you all thought.
fizzbang 01-31-05, 01:20 PM	Yowza. I can certainly understand your reasoning behind that decision, but I don't think it'd detract from the Eberron Experience (tm) to keep with the standard speed for PC level progression. The feeling that the players are the major figures in the setting is just as important as the fact that most people have low levels. That's the pulp influence there: the players are the characters with amazing potential, and they're the heroes that'll make the difference in the next major threat that faces the city/country/world. I worry that slowing down the progression of characters would begin to make the players feel like they're never making progress. I'd also worry that slowing their level progression without slowing their wealth accumulation might throw off some of the expected balance, but that's separate. I've been playing at standard progression speed, and it hasn't ruined the game for me. Of course it all comes down to this: If your players are happy and you're happy, then everything's fine.
Streamweaver 01-31-05, 01:23 PM	I don't see a problem with that. I actually use a flat 50% experience cut in my current campaign. I try to compensate by doing a lot of work to keep the sessions interesting. They encounter new things and situations all the time, are able to advance opportunities if not character levels fairly often. Been running for about 2 months now and players just love it.
Golbez57 01-31-05, 01:24 PM	If it works for you and your players, go for it! If ALL of you do sincerely enjoy the low- and mid-levels more than the later levels, rather than tweaking XP, I'd simply start with new characters once they start to push up against the point when the options and actions seem too wide open. You don't have to have their characters truly "end", as that's kind of a poor payoff for the time and energy invested in breathing life into them on the part of you and your players. Perhaps their 12th level characters become the patrons of their new 1st level characters, or are tied into your new adventures in some other significant way. New characters does not necessarily equate to a new campaign.
hiryuu 01-31-05, 01:31 PM	I usually ignore experience and hand out levels. It works like this: the PCs investigate things, that's part of what they do. PCs stick their noses into places, mess with things they shouldn't, and spend extensive time building contacts, getting contracts, and in general just futzing around. Every so often, I nearly kill them, take them down to an inch of their life or so, and when I dod it three or four times, I give them a level. It works out fine for the most part (and honestly, before the artificer, the magic item creation's never come up).
fizzbang 01-31-05, 02:10 PM	If it works for you and your players, go for it! If ALL of you do sincerely enjoy the low- and mid-levels more than the later levels, rather than tweaking XP, I'd simply start with new characters once they start to push up against the point when the options and actions seem too wide open. You don't have to have their characters truly "end", as that's kind of a poor payoff for the time and energy invested in breathing life into them on the part of you and your players. Perhaps their 12th level characters become the patrons of their new 1st level characters, or are tied into your new adventures in some other significant way. New characters does not necessarily equate to a new campaign. This is an excellent, and oft-forgotten technique. It also really allows you to create a dynasty of characters, complete with interesting re-envisionings of similar character concepts or interesting foils for older characters. And it lets the DM work with much longer-term intrigues, not to mention having a set of well-known and well-made NPCs ready-made for the games!
Edymnion 01-31-05, 03:04 PM	I really like generational games myself. To use a... less than well loved... example (assuming you enjoy anime) is to look at the entire span of the Dragonball series. It starts off a lot like a D&D game in terms of power level. Goku is a young boy, a monk, Bulma is an artificer, etc. They go on a big long quest to gather the Dragonballs to make a wish. The entire first season is nothing but the quest to find the Dragonballs. Then, as the original Dragonball series progressed through the seasons, Goku grew into a teen, he fell in love with one of the female characters. Dragonball Z rolls around, and Goku is now a full grown man, with a young son. As DBZ goes through, we follow not only Goku, but his son Gohan learning how to fight, and a new campaign unfolding that takes them to another planet to fight a new BBEG and his lackies. After a few more things, it fast forwards again, now Goku has another son, Goten, and one of the villians from the last campaign is now a trusted friend. Vegita, the old enemy, has also married one of the original characters and has a son named Trunks. It now focuses as much around these new children as it does the old heroes. Gohan is now a teen, and has a love interest. Dragonball GT is aired, and now most of the original characters have grown much older. Gohan and the love interest before are now married, and have a child of their own, named Pan. The show now focuses almost exclusively on Goku (who was turned into a child again by an abberant wish), Trunks, and Goku's granddaughter Pan. And, at the end of GT, it fast fowards again. Pan, who was a pre-teen before is now an elderly grandmother, watching her grandson compete in a martial arts competition against the great great grandson of Vegita. The old guard is completely gone now, but their children's children carry the story onwards. New adventures always around the next corner, if not for the original characters, than for their friends, and their children. As often as people badmouth Dragonball, its quite rare that you actually see a show that covers a good hundred years of story that tracks not one, not two, but three generations of characters, with a glimpse at the end into yet another generation. Its a great story not because of the endless fight scenes, but in how the characters develop and change over time, and how all of the new things tie into what has come before. Its the same world, but with many differant campaigns (or Sagas, if you want to go by the DB conventions). A persistant world can be one of the most fun to play in :)
Gurv 01-31-05, 03:24 PM	Generation games work best when the older characters are retired at a middle level, which makes them perfect in the sense mentioned above. I caution against playing the offspring of truely high level characters, unless the DM has some serious plans for explaining why 'dad' can't solve problems for the PC. Just watch that you don't unwittingly ruin the lack of high level NPCs around to save the day. I wouldn't go so far as to actually lower the XP rewards earned by a percentage. Give less XP, make them work for it. But reducing it by a percentage is almost like saying "Well, you earned more, but my houserules says you don't get it." That just rubs me the wrong way. I just look at the table in the DMG, find the amount that a PC should gain for an equal level encounter, and divide that by four (the number of party members the table is based on). Then I give that amount for every 20% of a character's resources that an encounter consumes.