Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Old_One 09-15-04, 07:12 AM	I was wansering would character learn anything while they are "doing nothing"? It seams to me that even while the PCs are just sitting in a town waiting for their friend to heal after taking on the dragon they learn a little bit. They are talking to difrent pepole, hearing stories from the bartender and the local drunk etc. So I'm thinking to give my PCs a small amonunt of xp for down time. 0,5-1 xp/day of town rest 1-2 xp/day of open road travel Does this sound to crazy or ok. I'm not talking about 1st lvl characters but 7-9 party.
Nurgan_the_drunked 09-15-04, 08:34 AM	It doen't sound crazy, but it does sound kinda pointless: at that level it's fairly immaterial if its only such a bonus. It may work to get players off your back if they're insisting they should. If you do want to implement it, I'd recommend making it so that they learn better if they arrange a good environment, eg. tutorage, training, library access, as this gives them something to do, rather than XP for nothing. Oh and consider what level people can get from doing the same and not going adventuring (those heads of wizards schools aint killing beholders on their days off. Are they?) By my calculations, studying an art for 50 years, in an improved environment over this, would still only make you 8th
DM Zoc 09-15-04, 08:52 AM	By my calculations, studying an art for 50 years, in an improved environment over this, would still only make you 8th That actually sounds about right to me. It makes sense why all of the good wizards are so old, ne?
Nurgan_the_drunked 09-15-04, 08:59 AM	Yes, but you consider that some upstart skips his lectures, doesn't study, and instead blows up a load of monsters reaches that level of competency in a tenth of that time, it seems a bit odd. I'm guessing, though, that "what they do" is where the main XP comes from. Arguably, if a university has two bosses of high level (call it 8, that's where I started) have negotiations about funds, whichever gets the best deal has, in a way (tenuous I know) defeated an 8th level ecounter. General life and getting involved and tied down in the right environment will give you XP faster, probably, than dropping in for a few days. Weeee! What a fun tangent!
Thelon Fairblade 09-15-04, 09:07 AM	Th eguideline I use is that you advance a level in roughly 2 years, regardless of your level. a 10-year veteran is a 5th level warrior. A 10th year journeyman is a 5th level expert. Etc. So 2000 "work hours" in a year, do the math. A 4th level character needs 5000 xp to advance. 2 years to advance is 2500 xp each year = roughly 1.25 per hour or 10 xp per day.
Pagan priest 09-15-04, 05:08 PM	Quite a while ago, I started out setting up a table of various activities a character could engage in during non-adventuring, down time. Carousing, library reasearch, weapons drill, farming, a rather non-specific "working in field", and several others. The basic idea was that actually working in one's field was the best way to spend time to gain XP. Bards did better at carousing than monks or wizards. Wizards gained more through library reasearch than fighters or rogues. Etc, etc, etc. 20xp per week, and 50 weeks per year (vacations & holidays don't count) earn a person 1,000xp per year. I consider that to be the maximum available, outside special training circumstances. In general, this is how NPC's get ahead in the world. Most of the things on the table were things that a person could earn a living at. Special Training Circumstances: this represents things like university education, schools of wizardry and the like. In general, it takes money to gain this. Effects vary, as does cost. I feel that an expert going to a university to study classes within his field of expertise will gain 2,000xp per year. I came to this conclusion after creating a "Doctor PrC" for the expert NPC class and decided that 5 years at a university was enough to learn everything needed to qualify for the PrC.
RealMad 09-15-04, 05:16 PM	Th eguideline I use is that you advance a level in roughly 2 years, regardless of your level. a 10-year veteran is a 5th level warrior. A 10th year journeyman is a 5th level expert. Etc. So 2000 "work hours" in a year, do the math. A 4th level character needs 5000 xp to advance. 2 years to advance is 2500 xp each year = roughly 1.25 per hour or 10 xp per day. 2 yrs/level? That really doesn't sound right. Without even getting into the matter that it takes the same amount of time to advance from level 1 to 2 as it does 19 to 20, this skews the system heavily towards the longer-living races.
Razorblade Smile 09-15-04, 05:18 PM	For non-adventurers, I tend to assume that it takes (current level) years of study and experience to go up a level, and a minimum of one solid year of practice as a 0th-level apprentice to hit 1st level. Half that time for NPC classes. 1st level: 1 year of practice and study 2nd level: 1 year of practice and study (2 years total) 3rd level: 2 years of practice and study (4 years total) 4th level: 3 years of practice and study (7 years total) 5th level: 4 years of practice and study (11 years total) 6th level: 5 years of practice and study (16 years total) 7th level: 6 years of practice and study (22 years total) 8th level: 7 years of practice and study (29 years total) 9th level: 8 years of practice and study (37 years total) 10th level: 9 years of practice and study (46 years total) etc. For an NPC class like the Commoner, it would only take 23 years of practice and experience to hit 10th level.
DM Zoc 09-15-04, 09:10 PM	In this case, however, any elf could just take a short break between and adventures and reach epic level without even becoming "old."
Razorblade Smile 09-15-04, 09:45 PM	In this case, however, any elf could just take a short break between and adventures and reach epic level without even becoming "old." A break for an elf is the same as a break for anyone else. Unless you're in a campaign setting taking place throughout the centuries, it's a non-issue really. It's more of a background thing to help gauge NPCs. Elves, for instance, are often depicted as spending most of their time in leisure and frivolity; the idea of spending long stretches of time doing something droll like studying and experimenting non-stop is anthesis to their nature. The above numbers are for dedicated study and experience.
darkwave 09-15-04, 09:55 PM	Hmmm... maybe THIS is where those "racial attitudes" come in? Humans earn 1K per year in their field (but not adventuring) if they put effort into it. Set this as the maximum possible for any race. Then adjust other races per their lifetimes. Maybe say Elves 100, Dwarves 300, halfings 200 (or whatever it works out to when you compare lifespan). Maybe bump up Elves and dwarves a hair extra (as they are viewed as somewhat powerful races even for their commoners). Then bump down most of the "monster" races. Again, this would be if they aren't adventuring but are "trying to make the most of downtime". (This also reduces the annoyance of going to the city with less than 100 exp to hit the next level, and then having to go out again - just work at everything for 2 weeks instead.)
Old_One 09-16-04, 03:19 AM	20xp per week, and 50 weeks per year (vacations & holidays don't count) earn a person 1,000xp per year. I consider that to be the maximum available, outside special training circumstances. In general, this is how NPC's get ahead in the world. Most of the things on the table were things that a person could earn a living at. In this case, however, any elf could just take a short break between and adventures and reach epic level without even becoming "old." Well since elvs live the longest they should be advancing the slowest. I mean it takes them longer to raech adulthud then a human can posibly live. Dwars are next in line but they have the whole hard working thing balancing it out. Gnomes and halfling only live about twice as long as humans, but humans even get the extra feat becouse of their motivation. IMO elvs should get 500xp/year, dwarws, gnomes, halfelvs and halflings 750xp/year and humans 1000xp/year. That said I think I will say IMC that the PCs, and only them, get only 5xp/day of down time. This is ofcourse if they aren't studying or practecing their art (this includes making profesion or craft checks). IMO the PCs have seen so much and experienced such wild situations that they can not posibly get involved in every day life enough to make the most of it. If you have seen a dwarwen citty burn at the hands of a salamander army or beged a god to bring your friend from the dead you'r not going to find the local tavren very intresting are you?
Pagan priest 09-16-04, 01:47 PM	IMO the PCs have seen so much and experienced such wild situations that they can not posibly get involved in every day life enough to make the most of it. If you have seen a dwarwen citty burn at the hands of a salamander army or beged a god to bring your friend from the dead you'r not going to find the local tavren very intresting are you? But here you are making assumptions about the character's personality. It is entirely possible that a character, after driving that salamander army back to the City of Brass, wants nothing more than to go back to a simple life of farming and animal husbandry, evenings spent in a village taproom with a pint and a pipe. I don't think that it is ever proper for a DM to dictate a character's personality, that is solely the job of the player. Now, having said all that, I do understand the point you were making. If a character can earn a dozen levels just sitting around, why go adventuring? One answer, bring the adventure to them. If you are creating interesting adventures with realistic hooks, the players will want to get involved. You know, not just "Oh, a farmer's daughter has been kidnapped." but "Hey! Did you hear? Orks raided Borfin's last night... they took Suzi. I guess the weddings gonna be delayed." Okay, kidnapping someone's betrothed is over used and a little trite, but still and all, you get the idea. If they want to be shop keepers, run an entire evening of keeping shop. Random dice rolls for number of customers, percent chance that they are just looking, profits in the single digit silver piece range (or less...) and soon the players will have enough of it and go looking for the nearest dungeon.
Old_One 09-17-04, 03:05 AM	It is entirely possible that a character, after driving that salamander army back to the City of Brass, wants nothing more than to go back to a simple life of farming and animal husbandry, evenings spent in a village taproom with a pint and a pipe. Yes and it is also posible that after all of that running, dodging, and casting he isn't going to find that taproom quite as stiumulating as he did before, there is much more he can learn in the heat of battle. But as for the rule it self, it is created with my specific group in mind. And well I have a druid who is also a major if the town that is their base of operations, a half orc fighter who is getting into the whole agriculurer buisnes (and he isn't growing pattoatos ;) ), a gnome sorc who is setting up a tatoo shop and all of them are owners of the finest tavren in all of Feuren. So downt time is quite full of rouleply. :D
Greyman 09-17-04, 07:04 AM	Well since elvs live the longest they should be advancing the slowest. I mean it takes them longer to raech adulthud then a human can posibly live. Dwars are next in line but they have the whole hard working thing balancing it out. Gnomes and halfling only live about twice as long as humans, but humans even get the extra feat becouse of their motivation. IMO elvs should get 500xp/year, dwarws, gnomes, halfelvs and halflings 750xp/year and humans 1000xp/year.There's no need to reduce the XP per year based on longevity. Simply base experience earned on a chalenge rating scale and note that the return for defeating a chalenge rating decreases with level. As noted in Sean Reynold's Theory about Peasants (http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/theoryaboutpeasants.html), at level 9 and above passing a CR 1 chalenge will generate no experience. So while longevious races would have more high level NPCs they wouldn't be able to reach epic levels without doing something extraordinary.
Naeron 09-17-04, 01:23 PM	This is exactly the system I use IMC. Life is generally a CR1/2 to CR3 challenge a year depending on the environment plus bonus challenges if there are major events in the locale (e.g. farmers get a bonus CR1/2 challenge if there its a bad year for crops). So as a person gains levels their rate slows down because they are facing the same challenges but they get easier to overcome. Eventually the same mundane existence ceases to challenge them at all and they stop progressing in level.
Pagan priest 09-17-04, 03:52 PM	Mr. Reynold's system is good, but I disagree with the idea that there are no more challenges once a commoner reaches 8th or 9th level. If a commoner starts at age 14 and gains 1,000xp per year, they will reach 9th level at age 50. By that time in their life, they are village elders and will likely be doing things in a political sphere, even if only on a local scale. As such, I see no reason to assume that the challenges stop at that point. The blocks just keep getting longer and longer, and perhaps the speed of xp gain slows down even if it continues thoughout one's life. When the Epic Level Handbook came out, there was an adventure in Dungeon. By completing the adventure, the characters were able to access a magic pool that opened them up to gaining epic levels. Without that pool, there was no possibility of gaining epic levels.
darkwave 09-17-04, 05:34 PM	Hmmm... How DO you get those 20th level human commoners? Shoot, they are almost always a few in the larger cities. It gets worse when you roll for epic (without making additional changes to the rules). I think I've tried to role play a commoner as far as possible and was pretty much utterly useless at 3rd level, and a drain on the others (except for brilliant role-playing ideas of course :D ) after level 7. If not for the mysteries and difficulties of home life, that is where he would have stayed. Shoot, I'm convinced that there should be no such thing as a first level spouse with the 2 year old kid template. 6th level is almost a prerequisite or something. (PrC Parent anyone?)
Endarire 09-18-04, 10:54 AM	Maybe it's not so much that the characters gain experience but they gain skill ranks and skill focus feats for repeated use. -EE
Greyman 09-19-04, 06:24 AM	Mr. Reynold's system is good, but I disagree with the idea that there are no more challenges once a commoner reaches 8th or 9th level. If a commoner starts at age 14 and gains 1,000xp per year, they will reach 9th level at age 50. By that time in their life, they are village elders and will likely be doing things in a political sphere, even if only on a local scale. As such, I see no reason to assume that the challenges stop at that point. The blocks just keep getting longer and longer, and perhaps the speed of xp gain slows down even if it continues thoughout one's life.It's not that the challenges stop, it's just that low level CR do not provide experience for mid to high level characters. So after level 9 you really have to start doing something extraordinary to continue progressing. There are those that will but they will be somewhat exceptional. Sean's system simply provides a baseline for the ordinary masses.
Pagan priest 09-19-04, 02:44 PM	My point was that as they get up in years, they will have bigger problems, as they are the elders of the village... the person everyone else turns to when they can't solve their own problem. Yes, some will just spend their golden years sitting on the front porch yelling at kids to stay out of the gardin. Others will be down at the meeting hall settling disputes, interceding with the feudal lord, hiring adventurers to deal with the monsters in the fen, all sorts of new, harder challenges. On the other hand, another way to look at things might be to say that in a good year, the challenges are smaller, it is easier to get in the harvest, etc... maybe in a good year the xp should be lowered and raised in a bad year. Good year: 750xp Average year: 1,000xp Bad year: 1,500xp
Greyman 09-19-04, 08:00 PM	I do agree that successful merchants, community leaders, officers of the guard, and the like will have harder challenges than the average. The question is, how much harder will these challenges be on the CR scale? Remember, we're talking about mundane day-to-day challenges for the most part, not bursts of excitement from minor natural or unnatural disaster, such as the occassional monster raid, fire outbreak, or such. Then too, of course, in some places raids by monsters might be fairly routine. The average yearly experience in such frontier places would be higher than the baseline for well defended centres of civilization. Then there are major disasters, like war, plagues, elemental storms, alien invasions, and comet impacts, that boost the average experience earned by the survivors that year.
DevaNinja 09-19-04, 11:51 PM	IMO the PCs have seen so much and experienced such wild situations that they can not posibly get involved in every day life enough to make the most of it. If you have seen a dwarwen citty burn at the hands of a salamander army or beged a god to bring your friend from the dead you'r not going to find the local tavren very intresting are you? Have you seen the ending of Return of the King? All of the hobbits (Except for Frodo) go back to their ordinary lives. Interestingly enough.....back at the tavern!
Old_One 09-20-04, 09:58 AM	Yes they go back to thier lives in the tavren. But do they learn many new things sitting in the same tavren all night? By intresting I ment "new and stumulating", something worthy of an XP bonus. Now at the real ending of Return of the King there is something that is worth a real XP bonus (those who read the books know what I'm talking about, those who didn't... well read the books :D ).
Etiquette_Gnome 10-01-04, 10:26 AM	I use another method (forget the origin), using Sean's article as a rule of thumb...which I shall now describe to you. As long as you are actively plying your trade in a manner that does not have immediate concerns towards your well-being (survive the tornado, orc raiders, etc), you earn 1xp per character level per day. On days you don't actively ply your trade, you don't earn experience; and eventually this source will stop on its own. Using Sean's article, the basics of peasant living are about a CR 1 encounter, and therefore you stop gaining experience once you reach level 9 from it. If you don't step up the challenges, like start trying to survive/harvest for a dozen people with that same plot of farmland, then you will stop gaining the 1xp/level/day. This works out to about three years per rise in character level, assuming you live a relatively hard life. This will also partially explain the elves, in that one of the major descriptions of their race is that they are an almost frivilous people that prefer most of their life to be spent lollygagging about making poetry and having parties. This isn't condusive towards gaining experience, as I have stated that 'vacation' time is no-XP time. Of course, the elves will still more or less cap out at 9th, since they'll still at least do something every so often over the centuries; unless they do more challenging things than self-substinance (sp?) on a plot of land. My preference for this method is for use on my players during their character's downtime, where they state they'll spend the next week or two at the training camps or something.
Aramil_silverwind 10-01-04, 02:40 PM	I personallythink you guys have the wrong idea... XP is short for Experience, which I personally see as short for Combat Experience. Granted, you DO learn lots from doing normal things like drawing a picture. You get better at frawing, of course. Thats what ranks in skills are for. IMC I'll give a PC some ranks in a skill if they do it often. But thats only if they do it REALLY often. And the 'bonus' ranks are gained through RP, and never go above the 'max ranks' for thier level. But arguing with a politcal figure in no way, shape, or form gives you combat experience. If I fought better after every verbal argument I had, I would be the most hardcore guy on this planet right now. Lawyers could single-handedly wipe out entire street gangs. You get better at combat the same way you get better at taking photos - you do it. Another house rule in mygame about XP comes out of that argument. If a player ends combat before it begins (like by killing every orc in their sleep rather than attacking in the daytime) they get no XP. Such actions give them no tangible combat experience, and thus they will not be able to throw their dagger any more accurate. At least you found a way to get around the challenge before you. there was no real XP gain, but I'm sure that the PLAYERS have learned a thing or two about non-combat tactics to win the day.
Old_One 10-04-04, 09:18 AM	And this where I can not agree with you. Experience should not be all about combat, granted killing stuf is the quickest way of earning it but that is only becouse it is the most esely mesurable aspect of the game. In my game I also give XP if a problem is solved through non violent means. If the PCs find a way of talking the orcs you mention out of atacking them or waht ever the orcs were going to do, the not only get all the XP (for defeting the chalenge) but also a bonus of 20-30% for taking the harder way and maybe even a better one. Ofcourse the exemple is a little bit strange but you get the point. Now what I dont like is giving peapole extra skil-points. A rogue is going to get an insane bonus to search/hide/move silently/etc, the bard to performance, the wizard to spelcraft..... This is not a good idea becouse if you start going down that why shouldn't the fighter get the same bonus to base atack, he certenly uses it a lot? If a fighter decides to learn singing and gets some perforamnce ranks and than spends a month singing in the tavren he learns as much as the sorcerer who sets up a tatoo shop and earns money that way for the same amonut of time. And that is also experience only earnd with less blood being spiled in the proces.
Krelios 10-04-04, 09:47 AM	I personallythink you guys have the wrong idea... XP is short for Experience, which I personally see as short for Combat Experience. Granted, you DO learn lots from doing normal things like drawing a picture. You get better at frawing, of course. Thats what ranks in skills are for. IMC I'll give a PC some ranks in a skill if they do it often. But thats only if they do it REALLY often. And the 'bonus' ranks are gained through RP, and never go above the 'max ranks' for thier level. But arguing with a politcal figure in no way, shape, or form gives you combat experience. If I fought better after every verbal argument I had, I would be the most hardcore guy on this planet right now. Lawyers could single-handedly wipe out entire street gangs. You get better at combat the same way you get better at taking photos - you do it. Another house rule in mygame about XP comes out of that argument. If a player ends combat before it begins (like by killing every orc in their sleep rather than attacking in the daytime) they get no XP. Such actions give them no tangible combat experience, and thus they will not be able to throw their dagger any more accurate. At least you found a way to get around the challenge before you. there was no real XP gain, but I'm sure that the PLAYERS have learned a thing or two about non-combat tactics to win the day. So a cooper who makes barrels for a living and has never picked up a weapon in his life will never be able to progress beyond Expert 1? After 20 years of making barrels, he won't be ANY better than the day he started? How does killing a goblin teach him how to make better barrels? Experience is exactly that. You get it for "overcoming obstacles." In the adventuring life, those obstacles could very likely kill you, so you learn quickly to survive. In normal life, those obstacles are more mundane (trade negotiations, crop harvests/shortages, labor disputes, bandits, taxation, etc.), but they are still challenges to be overcome, so you still gain experience. Your argument about killing orcs in their sleep is equally ludicrous. If your players are smart and use the terrain and situation to their advantage you give them no xp? I guess they learn more by waking the orcs up and fighting them stupidly then they do from outsmarting them in the first place. That's not D&D and it's NOT what the DMG says about experience. The whole point of adventuring is to minimize the risk to yourself while accomplishing your goals--that's survival instinct, anyone who goes out of their way to make things harder for themselves is suicidal and is learning less than those who have to think before they fight.
DM Zoc 10-04-04, 10:55 AM	So a cooper who makes barrels for a living and has never picked up a weapon in his life will never be able to progress beyond Expert 1? After 20 years of making barrels, he won't be ANY better than the day he started? How does killing a goblin teach him how to make better barrels? Experience is exactly that. You get it for "overcoming obstacles." In the adventuring life, those obstacles could very likely kill you, so you learn quickly to survive. In normal life, those obstacles are more mundane (trade negotiations, crop harvests/shortages, labor disputes, bandits, taxation, etc.), but they are still challenges to be overcome, so you still gain experience. Your argument about killing orcs in their sleep is equally ludicrous. If your players are smart and use the terrain and situation to their advantage you give them no xp? I guess they learn more by waking the orcs up and fighting them stupidly then they do from outsmarting them in the first place. That's not D&D and it's NOT what the DMG says about experience. The whole point of adventuring is to minimize the risk to yourself while accomplishing your goals--that's survival instinct, anyone who goes out of their way to make things harder for themselves is suicidal and is learning less than those who have to think before they fight. I was just checking the DMG over the weekend. To my disappointment, I found an example in there about a party of adventurers who fights several groups of orc warriors, and then manages to defeat a whole encampment of them by sneaking up while they slept. It states very clearly that the characters get experience for defeating the warriors in combat, but nothing from defeating the larger number of orcs because they didn't put themselves at risk.
Krelios 10-04-04, 11:44 AM	Care to site a page number so I can cross that stupidity out of my DMG?
DM Zoc 10-05-04, 12:51 AM	Forty-seven.
Felonious Monk 10-05-04, 02:42 AM	Look at it this way... using your skills and talents to defeat obstacles gains you XP, which funds your skills and talents. It's not all about that +1 to Base Attack Bonus (although, if you are a stupid enough fighter, it's close) . I've always disliked that "killing things is the only thing that will make you gain experience" attitude. Combat is an effective way to gain experience, I should think, for fighter-types, for combat spellcasters, and for rogues and others for whom the pressure of combat is a useful test. But it shouldn't be the only way.
Aramil_silverwind 10-05-04, 12:17 PM	So a cooper who makes barrels for a living and has never picked up a weapon in his life will never be able to progress beyond Expert 1? No he won't. Because making barrels in no way, shape, or form gets you to fight better. If you make barrels all your life, you're going to get better at making barrels, not killing. This is why boxers make better fighters than babysitters. Because while babysitting WOULD give you bonuses in Diplomacy, Bluff, Sense Motive, and other skills, it will not teach you where to strike someone for a knock-out shot. The Boxer on the other hand, his JOB is to fight, much like an adventurer. He gets good at fighting because he learns from mistakes in previous fights, and he remembers fluke places he hit one and will try to hit them again. Now what I dont like is giving peapole extra skil-points. A rogue is going to get an insane bonus to search/hide/move silently/etc, the bard to performance, the wizard to spelcraft..... Thats why I limit it to the max ranks for your level. Because everyone hits a skill plateau every once and a while. I don't want a rogue at leve 3 to have 9 ranks in MS, so he won't. He needs to get into combat and observe how his enemies move and how they shift their attention from place to place. Only when witnessing a someone on guard (like in combat, or a guard) can the rogue begin to think about new sneaking techniques. why shouldn't the fighter get the same bonus to base atack, he certenly uses it a lot? Yes, he does get bonuses to that. Its called XP. Notice how they don't get much skill points at a level up. Thats because they focus on killing stuff and learning how to do it more efficiently. He certainly does use it alot. In combat. And IMO, combat should merrit combat experience. And you do NOT get better at fighting by killing things. I would give out XP if they subdued the band of orcs using non-lethal damage. Its not about taking the life of another creature, its about being in combat and learning from it. Eventually if they PCs used it enough I might start lowering the -4 that you take from doing subdual with a deadly weapon, because they've learned how to do it after so long of doing that.
Archtyrant Terevoth 10-05-04, 03:34 PM	I've never really seen the point of XP systems like this. XP is an arbitrary mechanic which basically solely applies to PCs, and possibly NPCs if they make up part of your heroic cast of chracters. They get XP for going on adventures solely because you don't want them sitting about town doing nothing. If for some reason you wanted a lot of time to pass, you could have it pass and give them XP for it, but you really don't need a system for it. NPCs who are not the dramatic focus of the campaign are simply whatever level you want them to be. And when you think they should go up a level, they do. This is a case of rules for things that really don't need rules.
Two Rivers Wolfbrother 10-05-04, 06:35 PM	Just give "challenge ratings" to non-combat encounters, such as solving mysteries, finding long-lost spells in libraries, working a deal with a tough noble, etc. Things that are really not all that heroic, such as making a masterwork dagger or tricking a guard away from his post, should be, say, CR 1 (or 2 at most), while as you go up and up, higher and higher, you could potentially have CR 20+ non-combat encounters, such as deadly traps, manipulating a legendary emperor, what have you. Regarding non-heroic classes and experience, this gives them the opportunity to expertise in their trade without having to fight. A human blacksmith who takes Skill Emphasis: Craft, as well as a moderately high Intelligence rating could start with a +8 or higher in Craft: blacksmithing, and as he makes more and more challenging items, he becomes better, levels up, and possibly eventually takes more feats to enhance his abilities, increases his Intelligence, and after so long he'll be level 20, without even necessarily having fought many fights!