gaining levels too quickly? - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 dunk6666 Aug 20, 2014 17:11:21	After a 30 year absence from the game, I am going to play the 5e with my Son. When I played AD&D 1e, it took a long time to advance levels. After you completed a module, you might gain enough exp for a level or two. In the starter edition, if you complete the Mines of Phandelver, you are expected to be around level 7. That is 1/3 of the way to 20. Granted you need more exp to level of on an exponential scale, but the exp you earn will be higher too. At this pace, your character would be level 20 after three big adventures. In Ad&D, you could play a long time (years) before you could achieve that. My question is, is 5e about getting your characters very powerful quickly and cycling through new ones or is it more of staying with one and evolving them for years, as in AD&D? DUNK6666
#2 TiaNadiezja Aug 20, 2014 17:34:32	I'm tending toward short, BECMI-style adventures. My players levelled to 2 near the end of my first module - a rewrite of B1 Keep on the Borderlands. Since levels 1 and 2 are supposed to go by fast, that felt right to me. Lost Mine must be really long to get a party to 7...
#3 seti Aug 20, 2014 17:39:33	It seems like they want you to get from level 1 to about level 3 very quickly (at level 3-4 you get to start to really customize your PC). Then 5e tapers down a bit, making it take longer to level. But, yeah...1e was slower. As was 2e. 3e and 4e speeded things up, and also balanced the xp needed for each class, ie: every PC advances at the same rate. It's an easy fix, however. If you want slower advancement, halve the XP you give out. If you want faster, double it. But, be cautious; published adventures assume you're leveling at the 'prescribed' rate, so...if it's assumed you'll be level 2-3, but aren't yet, a PC might just die with one bad roll.
#4 Noon Aug 20, 2014 17:40:23	Have you tried a shorter cycle play? Perhaps just try it out - it's a shorter cycle, after all, so it wont take as much time investment to try out.
#5 pukunui Aug 20, 2014 17:58:23	My understanding is that Lost Mine is only supposed to get you to level 5. Also, the devs have said that levels 1 and 2 are only meant to take about one session each. There will be alternate XP advancement charts in the DMG for those who want slower (or even faster!) advancement rates.
#6 arderkrag Aug 20, 2014 18:04:11	Of all the things I don't get about people, the desire to get the "apprentice" levels over more quickly than later levels baffles me since low level play is what I've always preferred. I remember there was a poll about this somewhere along the way. I'll stick with it for now, but in the future I may halve experience rewards for 1st and 2nd level.
#7 Whir Aug 20, 2014 18:04:04	I like the 1 - 2 - 3 advancement set up. It lets new players get a feel before jumping into a subclass. And you can 2e it for advanced players and just start at level 3. It seems like the best of both worlds. I thought Lost Mines was supposed to end around level 5 though?
#8 dunk6666 Aug 20, 2014 18:16:28	Sorry, Hoard of the Dragon Queen gets you to level 7, the Mines only 5.
#9 Shiroiken Aug 20, 2014 19:06:59	By design, you should go from Level 1 to 20 in about a year IRL. The DMG is supposed to have suggestions for a slower or faster pace. I'm thinking about doing 50% XP for my next campaign, but I'm not sure yet. It starts with Temple of Elemental Evil, and just T1 (Villiage of Hommelett and the Moathouse) should easily put the party to level 3. I fear that this will put the part at level 10 before they finish, if not higher!
#10 Dooflegna Aug 21, 2014 0:47:29	5e is designed to get you right to level 3 as fast as possible without being completely ridiculous. Achieving level 3 is 900 XP; to get to the next level, you need double that (another 1800 to get to 2700 total). Obviously, adventures are going to be designed with those assumptions in mind, but if you're homebrewing, there's absolutely no reason you can't completely change the XP progression path. Even then, you can edit the adventures to be more level 1, 2, and 3 friendly. The DMG will almost certainly add slower XP progression path or even alternate XP systems (XP by treasure!).
#11 Valdark Aug 21, 2014 1:06:21	I agree that it is far too quick for my tastes. I will definitely be altering progression for my games. The same goes for the healing system. Far too forgiving and quick for my tastes but a simple fix really. The system is catered to a much more casual playstyle than we 2e players remember but that has been a steady progression since 2e. Nothing surprising here.
#12 Atheosis Aug 21, 2014 1:49:22	As others have said just slow down XP gain if it's too fast for you. There used to be the opposite issue with AD&D and some people sped it up to fit their taste. XP rewards never happen at a rate that makes everyone happy, no matter the edition. This is only a real issue if you want to run published adventures, as those are designed with the defaul XP rates in mind.
#13 Noon Aug 21, 2014 1:57:55	arderkrag wrote:
#14 TiaNadiezja Aug 21, 2014 2:18:54	Noon wrote:
#15 Plaguescarred1 Aug 21, 2014 2:34:51	Its quick for sure. If am not mistaken Mike Mearls alluded on twitter that alternate XP progression could be found in the Dungeon Master Guide to change pace though.
(Reply to #15) Valdark	Plaguescarred wrote:
#17 Plaguescarred1 Aug 21, 2014 2:42:48	Valdark wrote:
(Reply to #17) Valdark	Plaguescarred wrote:
(Reply to #13) arderkrag	Noon wrote:
#20 Diceman65 Aug 21, 2014 3:43:52	arderkrag wrote:
#21 Diceman65 Aug 21, 2014 4:11:13	Valdark wrote:
#22 Nesian42Ryukaiel Aug 21, 2014 4:15:24	Or just let them level up when you(the DM) would like them to. Use XP only for vague encounter measurements.
(Reply to #21) Valdark	Diceman65 wrote:
#24 Dooflegna Aug 21, 2014 4:42:33	Diceman65 wrote:
(Reply to #24) Valdark	Dooflegna wrote:
#26 Diceman65 Aug 21, 2014 5:28:51	Dooflegna wrote:
#27 SteeleButterfly Aug 21, 2014 5:31:48	I don't think my group will want to race through 1st and 2nd levels. We have a group of PCs we've been playing since 1983, and the highest level is 16th. We like the slow advancement -- it gives us a chance to really appreciate the abilities of each level. After my introductory 5e game for the group, I'm going to offer to convert those higher-level PCs to 5e and see how they work. I'm of two minds whether to give them EXP (as one of our DMs does) or just tell them when they level (which is how I'm doing it now). I'm also seriously considering letting the players choose a subclass at 1st, not 2nd or 3rd. It seems odd to me that a subclass comes later for most PCs -- what's the in-game reason for it? To my mind, it would be a logical choice based on character concept.
#28 Diceman65 Aug 21, 2014 5:53:24	SteeleButterfly wrote:
#29 Emerikol. Aug 21, 2014 6:04:23	If it really does get you from 1 to 20 in a single year of weekly play then I think it is way too fast for me. Still I agree with plague that it's not very hard to fix. I tend to see it as an exponential curve. 1. 1st to 9th level in one year of weekly four hour play. 2. Add another 3 levels per year of weekly four our play after that. Year 1, 9th level Year 2, 12th level Year 3, 15th level Year 4, 18th level Year 5, 20+ level. I could definitely see it tweaked a little one way or the other. Gygax said his games were at 12th level after five years so that is a bit slow for me. And no a campaign does not always have to go to 20th level. I could go a bit faster than above at times. I don't see going to 20 in one year though. That seems crazy to me. (But okay if you like it :-)). Edit: Just as an addition to my comments. I don't think linear advancement rate is a good idea.
#30 Dooflegna Aug 21, 2014 6:11:26	Diceman65 wrote:
#31 Keen_Man Aug 21, 2014 7:18:00	they have an optional rule for milestone experiance. In this setup you pick plot points in your adventures at which the players level up instead of giving out XP. you can set whatever rate of advancement you want useing that. Its mentioned in the dragon queen module.
#32 mellored Aug 21, 2014 8:15:58	They tried to make it so you could go 1-20 in a school season. But yea, it's easy to adjust.
#33 dunk6666 Aug 21, 2014 8:21:11	Thank you for all your responses to my first ever post. Many of you said that 5e is flexible that you can set the xp level or advancement to your liking with houserules. That is true. But I am looking to find out what WOTC intended for advancement in the design of 5e. Very little, as far as i know, has been released for adventures in 5e; Hoard of the Dragon Queen and Lost Mine of Phandelver. When I said 3 adventures might get you to 20, i was extrapolating that number based on Hoard of the Dragon Queen taking to to level 7. With all my experience being with 1e, the modules there were designed for small intervals of levels; say 4-7 or 7-9. Often there were four modlules that made up a complete series that would still be appropriate for a range of levels; the slavers modules S1 - S4. Maybe the next adventures that WOTC releases will be designed for a smaller range of levels. Does anyone know? Also if the level jumps are high per adventure it doesn't allow you to take your PC on a lot of quests because you have passed that level. For example, if you come out of an adventure at level 7, then you are too powerful to take on an adventure that was designed for level 4-7. You miss out on a lot of fun. I keep referring to the 1e modules because at this point that is where my experience lies. I did hear some people say they were using the old modules in 5e. Is that common? Will they be released for 5e? is there a easy and logical way to convert them to 5e? For my next statement, lets assume that 5e was designed to get PCs to the end of their career a bit quick. This would stike me as odd, as they seem to be really focusing on character development with the backgrounds and they stories they want you to put into your PC. I really like that concept and think it enhances role playing. But I would hate to put all that creative effort into my PC and to have his career advance with haste. I would want to take all that effort and enjoy it for a long time. (yes, i know i can slow it down, but i am talking about the way WOTC intends it to be).
#34 Dooflegna Aug 21, 2014 8:26:46	dunk6666 wrote:
#35 DemoMonkey Aug 21, 2014 9:27:25	Anyone know what level the second adventure, "Rise of Tiamat", is supposed to take you to? That might help extrapolate the module experience curve better. To the OP: First, the HOTDQ adventure is (in old school terms) more like a module series than a module. It's not G1, it's G 1 to 3, for example. That partly explains the level spread. Secondly, Level 1 and 2 are indeed very fast because they were designed to be "Apprentice" levels. A lot of people look at that statement and think of it as the character being an apprentice in their class at that level. That isn't the right perspective. Level 1 and 2 are the apprenticeship levels of the PLAYER. They are the players chance to see how the system and their characters work, before they have to start making complex decisions. (And why clerics and wizards make choices before level 3 I don't know, it's one of my pet peeves, but let's move on). Prolonging those levels can certainly be done, but that's kind of like trying to prolong the tutorial of a computer game. You are certainly welcome to, but it's not really what it's designed for.
#36 zgrose Aug 21, 2014 9:46:10	Anyone know what level the second adventure, "Rise of Tiamat", is supposed to take you to?
#37 Einlanzer Aug 21, 2014 12:44:47	Valdark wrote:
#38 Atheosis Aug 21, 2014 15:11:07	zgrose wrote:
#39 Thoughts_My_Aim Aug 21, 2014 15:19:07	It might be worth pointing out that the XP progression in 5E is not only non-linear, but also doesn't vary linearly. As I recall, in 3.X the number of XP required to reach the next level increased linearly, so it was 1000 for level 2, 3000 for level 3, 6000 for level 4 and so on. Assuming a similar rate of XP gain to 3.X (and this isn't a given, of course), this makes levels 1-4 pass more quickly but slow down afterwards, so you should spend less time at levels 1-6 but more time at eachof levels 7-20. Obviously in reality it will depend how you hand out XP in your game.
#40 dunk6666 Aug 21, 2014 15:56:45	http://www.koboldpress.com/k/front-page18252.php#.U_Yh0UtVIeQ For the Dungeons & Dragons tabletop roleplaying game, the story told in Tyranny of Dragons is spread across two separate adventure products: Hoard of the Dragon Queen and The Rise of Tiamat. Hoard begins with fledgling, level 1 characters and follows them to level 7 or 8. Rise picks up right where Hoard leaves off and continues on to level 14 or 15. But while these form one continuous story, they are very, very different adventures, and not only because of the difference in tiers—although that plays into it.
#41 dunk6666 Aug 21, 2014 16:02:48	Thoughts_My_Aim wrote:
#42 Fantasyfilmsman Aug 21, 2014 16:10:19	If you designed encounters around CR values as you leveled up it would take roughly 202 encounters to reach level 20. If you designed them around a CR level lower it would take 270 encounters to get to 20.
#43 Atheosis Aug 21, 2014 18:55:02	dunk6666 wrote:
#44 Noon Aug 21, 2014 19:53:58	arderkrag wrote:
#45 Furion_Thamior Aug 22, 2014 8:04:01	Faster levelling curves are important for a younger generation of gamers Particularily those of us in the age range of 16 to 28 (i.e. most millienials and generation Z) who may or may not still be in school. We are early in our careers/ lives that moving to a new city or significant upheavals in our social situation is possible. We don't have the stability to keep up a five-year campaign, and to be honest, that kind of persistance doesn't mirror our lived experiences. We often have varying social groups, meet new people regularily, and pick up new interests and ideas quickly. We want to explore multiple campaign ideas with multiple characters, and anything lasting more than a year is seen as long and permanent (kind of like our dating lives...) In a major urban/ school environment, a campaign has a fixed lifespan of about a year or so. It's entirely possible (and common) for campaigns to end in April or June, and everyone to start a new campaign in September with new characters. Now that I'm a grad student, I have a long-running game with a few close and well-established friends, but it took about 3-4 years for that to build up. Also, a faster leveling curve is better for the industry, since more characters and campaigns are made. Which means more reason to buy into splatbooks and adventure paths. You can always slow the curve if you feel the need to do so, but I would hazard that many millenials, the fast curve is ideal.
(Reply to #45) AaronOfBarbaria	Furion_Thamior wrote:
(Reply to #46) seti	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#48 zgrose Aug 22, 2014 11:01:10	For me, leveling speed is dependent on how much plot I have between where we start (the new heroes) and where I want to end (climactic battle in the clouds against a triad of red dragons). In my last extended campaign in 4e, I doubled the XP rewards because I didn't have a enough content and time to get the PCs from point A to B. So far I like the default speed as it moves the PCs out of the Kobold/Goblin death threat range quickly which opens up more creatures to build encounters with.
#49 Thoughts_My_Aim Aug 22, 2014 11:38:05	Fantasyfilmsman wrote:
#50 Corwyn77 Aug 22, 2014 14:05:16	Thoughts_My_Aim wrote:
#51 Dooflegna Aug 22, 2014 14:25:48	Furion_Thamior wrote:
(Reply to #9) Azzy1974	Shiroiken wrote:
#53 Chimpadin Aug 23, 2014 1:27:57	This is very much a personal preference thing, but from my experience players get frustrated if they don't level up at least every 4-5 sessions. In my opinion it is a game after all and games are meant to be fun. Another way I think about it is like this: Say a level 1 to 20 campaign takes a year, playing weekly. Call it 50 weeks with with a couple of breaks. 20 levels in to 50 weeks give 2.5 weeks per level in order to get there. But at the end of the day, how fast you give out XP is up to you and your group. I would advise not frustrating them though.
#54 Brock_Landers Aug 23, 2014 1:50:00	I gave up on XP after about a year of DMing 3rd Ed, now just level up the party when we all feel it's appropriate.
#55 mellored Aug 23, 2014 8:28:29	seti wrote:
#56 JohnLynch Aug 23, 2014 8:29:18	I'm not finding it too slow actually. We're gaining 1 level per session thus far which is about the rate we got it in Pathfinder. We play around 8 hour sessions each month so in a year (at the current rate) we'll hit level 12 after 12 months. As has been mentioned though, using an XP chart from prior editions will also work. Or dispense with it entirely. I personally like XP though. As for level preference, I realised I prefer levels 1-8 with 4th ed (combat got too slow) and levels 1-9 with Pathfinder if I'm DMing (players got too powerful). I'll wait and see what my preference is with 5th edition. Keen Man wrote:
#57 Mistwell Aug 23, 2014 9:45:40	Emerikol. wrote:
#58 Emirikol Aug 23, 2014 11:08:18	I'd toss the x.p system entirely anyways. It is simply about killing monsters (and anything else is just "optional," but i argue that D&D is geared 97% as a system, and in scenarios, towards combat.) So, why bother accounting x.p. anyways? A reasonable advancement would be four 4-hour game sessions per level (on average). Then, when it is time, finish your campaign and start a new one. Most DMs drag campaigns on waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too long anyways. X.P. doesn't have to be a hard rule. Advance as you see necessary. jh

Post/Author/DateTime

Post

dunk6666

Aug 20, 2014 17:11:21

After a 30 year absence from the game, I am going to play the 5e with my Son. When I played AD&D 1e, it took a long time to advance levels. After you completed a module, you might gain enough exp for a level or two. In the starter edition, if you complete the Mines of Phandelver, you are expected to be around level 7. That is 1/3 of the way to 20. Granted you need more exp to level of on an exponential scale, but the exp you earn will be higher too. At this pace, your character would be level 20 after three big adventures. In Ad&D, you could play a long time (years) before you could achieve that. My question is, is 5e about getting your characters very powerful quickly and cycling through new ones or is it more of staying with one and evolving them for years, as in AD&D?

DUNK6666

TiaNadiezja

Aug 20, 2014 17:34:32

I'm tending toward short, BECMI-style adventures. My players levelled to 2 near the end of my first module - a rewrite of B1 Keep on the Borderlands. Since levels 1 and 2 are supposed to go by fast, that felt right to me.

Lost Mine must be really long to get a party to 7...

seti

Aug 20, 2014 17:39:33

It seems like they want you to get from level 1 to about level 3 very quickly (at level 3-4 you get to start to really customize your PC). Then 5e tapers down a bit, making it take longer to level.

But, yeah...1e was slower. As was 2e. 3e and 4e speeded things up, and also balanced the xp needed for each class, ie: every PC advances at the same rate.

It's an easy fix, however. If you want slower advancement, halve the XP you give out. If you want faster, double it. But, be cautious; published adventures assume you're leveling at the 'prescribed' rate, so...if it's assumed you'll be level 2-3, but aren't yet, a PC might just die with one bad roll.

Noon

Aug 20, 2014 17:40:23

Have you tried a shorter cycle play? Perhaps just try it out - it's a shorter cycle, after all, so it wont take as much time investment to try out.

pukunui

Aug 20, 2014 17:58:23

My understanding is that Lost Mine is only supposed to get you to level 5. Also, the devs have said that levels 1 and 2 are only meant to take about one session each. There will be alternate XP advancement charts in the DMG for those who want slower (or even faster!) advancement rates.

arderkrag

Aug 20, 2014 18:04:11

Of all the things I don't get about people, the desire to get the "apprentice" levels over more quickly than later levels baffles me since low level play is what I've always preferred. I remember there was a poll about this somewhere along the way. I'll stick with it for now, but in the future I may halve experience rewards for 1st and 2nd level.

Whir

Aug 20, 2014 18:04:04

I like the 1 - 2 - 3 advancement set up. It lets new players get a feel before jumping into a subclass.

And you can 2e it for advanced players and just start at level 3.

It seems like the best of both worlds.

I thought Lost Mines was supposed to end around level 5 though?

dunk6666

Aug 20, 2014 18:16:28

Sorry, Hoard of the Dragon Queen gets you to level 7, the Mines only 5.

Shiroiken

Aug 20, 2014 19:06:59

By design, you should go from Level 1 to 20 in about a year IRL. The DMG is supposed to have suggestions for a slower or faster pace. I'm thinking about doing 50% XP for my next campaign, but I'm not sure yet. It starts with Temple of Elemental Evil, and just T1 (Villiage of Hommelett and the Moathouse) should easily put the party to level 3. I fear that this will put the part at level 10 before they finish, if not higher!

#10

Dooflegna

Aug 21, 2014 0:47:29

5e is designed to get you right to level 3 as fast as possible without being completely ridiculous. Achieving level 3 is 900 XP; to get to the next level, you need double that (another 1800 to get to 2700 total). Obviously, adventures are going to be designed with those assumptions in mind, but if you're homebrewing, there's absolutely no reason you can't completely change the XP progression path. Even then, you can edit the adventures to be more level 1, 2, and 3 friendly. The DMG will almost certainly add slower XP progression path or even alternate XP systems (XP by treasure!).

#11

Valdark

Aug 21, 2014 1:06:21

I agree that it is far too quick for my tastes.

I will definitely be altering progression for my games. The same goes for the healing system. Far too forgiving and quick for my tastes but a simple fix really. The system is catered to a much more casual playstyle than we 2e players remember but that has been a steady progression since 2e. Nothing surprising here.

#12

Atheosis

Aug 21, 2014 1:49:22

As others have said just slow down XP gain if it's too fast for you. There used to be the opposite issue with AD&D and some people sped it up to fit their taste. XP rewards never happen at a rate that makes everyone happy, no matter the edition. This is only a real issue if you want to run published adventures, as those are designed with the defaul XP rates in mind.

#13

Noon

Aug 21, 2014 1:57:55

arderkrag wrote:

#14

TiaNadiezja

Aug 21, 2014 2:18:54

Noon wrote:

#15

Plaguescarred1

Aug 21, 2014 2:34:51

Its quick for sure. If am not mistaken Mike Mearls alluded on twitter that alternate XP progression could be found in the Dungeon Master Guide to change pace though.

(Reply to #15)

Valdark

Plaguescarred wrote:

#17

Plaguescarred1

Aug 21, 2014 2:42:48

Valdark wrote:

(Reply to #17)

Valdark

Plaguescarred wrote:

(Reply to #13)

arderkrag

Noon wrote:

#20

Diceman65

Aug 21, 2014 3:43:52

arderkrag wrote:

#21

Diceman65

Aug 21, 2014 4:11:13

Valdark wrote:

#22

Nesian42Ryukaiel

Aug 21, 2014 4:15:24

Or just let them level up when you(the DM) would like them to. Use XP only for vague encounter measurements.

(Reply to #21)

Valdark

Diceman65 wrote:

#24

Dooflegna

Aug 21, 2014 4:42:33

Diceman65 wrote:

(Reply to #24)

Valdark

Dooflegna wrote:

#26

Diceman65

Aug 21, 2014 5:28:51

Dooflegna wrote:

#27

SteeleButterfly

Aug 21, 2014 5:31:48

I don't think my group will want to race through 1st and 2nd levels. We have a group of PCs we've been playing since 1983, and the highest level is 16th. We like the slow advancement -- it gives us a chance to really appreciate the abilities of each level. After my introductory 5e game for the group, I'm going to offer to convert those higher-level PCs to 5e and see how they work. I'm of two minds whether to give them EXP (as one of our DMs does) or just tell them when they level (which is how I'm doing it now). I'm also seriously considering letting the players choose a subclass at 1st, not 2nd or 3rd. It seems odd to me that a subclass comes later for most PCs -- what's the in-game reason for it? To my mind, it would be a logical choice based on character concept.

#28

Diceman65

Aug 21, 2014 5:53:24

SteeleButterfly wrote:

#29

Emerikol.

Aug 21, 2014 6:04:23

If it really does get you from 1 to 20 in a single year of weekly play then I think it is way too fast for me. Still I agree with plague that it's not very hard to fix.

I tend to see it as an exponential curve.

1. 1st to 9th level in one year of weekly four hour play.

2. Add another 3 levels per year of weekly four our play after that.

Year 1, 9th level

Year 2, 12th level

Year 3, 15th level

Year 4, 18th level

Year 5, 20+ level.

I could definitely see it tweaked a little one way or the other. Gygax said his games were at 12th level after five years so that is a bit slow for me. And no a campaign does not always have to go to 20th level. I could go a bit faster than above at times. I don't see going to 20 in one year though. That seems crazy to me. (But okay if you like it :-)).

Edit:

Just as an addition to my comments. I don't think linear advancement rate is a good idea.

#30

Dooflegna

Aug 21, 2014 6:11:26

Diceman65 wrote:

#31

Keen_Man

Aug 21, 2014 7:18:00

they have an optional rule for milestone experiance. In this setup you pick plot points in your adventures at which the players level up instead of giving out XP. you can set whatever rate of advancement you want useing that. Its mentioned in the dragon queen module.

#32

mellored

Aug 21, 2014 8:15:58

They tried to make it so you could go 1-20 in a school season.

But yea, it's easy to adjust.

#33

dunk6666

Aug 21, 2014 8:21:11

Thank you for all your responses to my first ever post.

Many of you said that 5e is flexible that you can set the xp level or advancement to your liking with houserules. That is true. But I am looking to find out what WOTC intended for advancement in the design of 5e. Very little, as far as i know, has been released for adventures in 5e; Hoard of the Dragon Queen and Lost Mine of Phandelver. When I said 3 adventures might get you to 20, i was extrapolating that number based on Hoard of the Dragon Queen taking to to level 7. With all my experience being with 1e, the modules there were designed for small intervals of levels; say 4-7 or 7-9. Often there were four modlules that made up a complete series that would still be appropriate for a range of levels; the slavers modules S1 - S4. Maybe the next adventures that WOTC releases will be designed for a smaller range of levels. Does anyone know? Also if the level jumps are high per adventure it doesn't allow you to take your PC on a lot of quests because you have passed that level. For example, if you come out of an adventure at level 7, then you are too powerful to take on an adventure that was designed for level 4-7. You miss out on a lot of fun.

I keep referring to the 1e modules because at this point that is where my experience lies. I did hear some people say they were using the old modules in 5e. Is that common? Will they be released for 5e? is there a easy and logical way to convert them to 5e?

For my next statement, lets assume that 5e was designed to get PCs to the end of their career a bit quick. This would stike me as odd, as they seem to be really focusing on character development with the backgrounds and they stories they want you to put into your PC. I really like that concept and think it enhances role playing. But I would hate to put all that creative effort into my PC and to have his career advance with haste. I would want to take all that effort and enjoy it for a long time. (yes, i know i can slow it down, but i am talking about the way WOTC intends it to be).

#34

Dooflegna

Aug 21, 2014 8:26:46

dunk6666 wrote:

#35

DemoMonkey

Aug 21, 2014 9:27:25

Anyone know what level the second adventure, "Rise of Tiamat", is supposed to take you to? That might help extrapolate the module experience curve better.

To the OP: First, the HOTDQ adventure is (in old school terms) more like a module series than a module. It's not G1, it's G 1 to 3, for example. That partly explains the level spread.

Secondly, Level 1 and 2 are indeed very fast because they were designed to be "Apprentice" levels. A lot of people look at that statement and think of it as the character being an apprentice in their class at that level. That isn't the right perspective.

Level 1 and 2 are the apprenticeship levels of the PLAYER. They are the players chance to see how the system and their characters work, before they have to start making complex decisions. (And why clerics and wizards make choices before level 3 I don't know, it's one of my pet peeves, but let's move on).

Prolonging those levels can certainly be done, but that's kind of like trying to prolong the tutorial of a computer game. You are certainly welcome to, but it's not really what it's designed for.

#36

zgrose

Aug 21, 2014 9:46:10

Anyone know what level the second adventure, "Rise of Tiamat", is supposed to take you to?

#37

Einlanzer

Aug 21, 2014 12:44:47

Valdark wrote:

#38

Atheosis

Aug 21, 2014 15:11:07

zgrose wrote:

#39

Thoughts_My_Aim

Aug 21, 2014 15:19:07

It might be worth pointing out that the XP progression in 5E is not only non-linear, but also doesn't vary linearly.

As I recall, in 3.X the number of XP required to reach the next level increased linearly, so it was 1000 for level 2, 3000 for level 3, 6000 for level 4 and so on.

Assuming a similar rate of XP gain to 3.X (and this isn't a given, of course), this makes levels 1-4 pass more quickly but slow down afterwards, so you should spend less time at levels 1-6 but more time at eachof levels 7-20.

Obviously in reality it will depend how you hand out XP in your game.

#40

dunk6666

Aug 21, 2014 15:56:45

http://www.koboldpress.com/k/front-page18252.php#.U_Yh0UtVIeQ

For the Dungeons & Dragons tabletop roleplaying game, the story told in Tyranny of Dragons is spread across two separate adventure products: Hoard of the Dragon Queen and The Rise of Tiamat. Hoard begins with fledgling, level 1 characters and follows them to level 7 or 8. Rise picks up right where Hoard leaves off and continues on to level 14 or 15. But while these form one continuous story, they are very, very different adventures, and not only because of the difference in tiers—although that plays into it.

#41

dunk6666

Aug 21, 2014 16:02:48

Thoughts_My_Aim wrote:

#42

Fantasyfilmsman

Aug 21, 2014 16:10:19

If you designed encounters around CR values as you leveled up it would take roughly 202 encounters to reach level 20. If you designed them around a CR level lower it would take 270 encounters to get to 20.

#43

Atheosis

Aug 21, 2014 18:55:02

dunk6666 wrote:

#44

Noon

Aug 21, 2014 19:53:58

arderkrag wrote:

#45

Furion_Thamior

Aug 22, 2014 8:04:01

Faster levelling curves are important for a younger generation of gamers

Particularily those of us in the age range of 16 to 28 (i.e. most millienials and generation Z) who may or may not still be in school. We are early in our careers/ lives that moving to a new city or significant upheavals in our social situation is possible. We don't have the stability to keep up a five-year campaign, and to be honest, that kind of persistance doesn't mirror our lived experiences. We often have varying social groups, meet new people regularily, and pick up new interests and ideas quickly. We want to explore multiple campaign ideas with multiple characters, and anything lasting more than a year is seen as long and permanent (kind of like our dating lives...)

In a major urban/ school environment, a campaign has a fixed lifespan of about a year or so. It's entirely possible (and common) for campaigns to end in April or June, and everyone to start a new campaign in September with new characters. Now that I'm a grad student, I have a long-running game with a few close and well-established friends, but it took about 3-4 years for that to build up.

Also, a faster leveling curve is better for the industry, since more characters and campaigns are made. Which means more reason to buy into splatbooks and adventure paths.

You can always slow the curve if you feel the need to do so, but I would hazard that many millenials, the fast curve is ideal.

(Reply to #45)

AaronOfBarbaria

Furion_Thamior wrote:

(Reply to #46)

seti

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

#48

zgrose

Aug 22, 2014 11:01:10

For me, leveling speed is dependent on how much plot I have between where we start (the new heroes) and where I want to end (climactic battle in the clouds against a triad of red dragons). In my last extended campaign in 4e, I doubled the XP rewards because I didn't have a enough content and time to get the PCs from point A to B.

So far I like the default speed as it moves the PCs out of the Kobold/Goblin death threat range quickly which opens up more creatures to build encounters with.

#49

Thoughts_My_Aim

Aug 22, 2014 11:38:05

Fantasyfilmsman wrote:

#50

Corwyn77

Aug 22, 2014 14:05:16

Thoughts_My_Aim wrote:

#51

Dooflegna

Aug 22, 2014 14:25:48

Furion_Thamior wrote:

(Reply to #9)

Azzy1974

Shiroiken wrote:

#53

Chimpadin

Aug 23, 2014 1:27:57

This is very much a personal preference thing, but from my experience players get frustrated if they don't level up at least every 4-5 sessions. In my opinion it is a game after all and games are meant to be fun.

Another way I think about it is like this: Say a level 1 to 20 campaign takes a year, playing weekly. Call it 50 weeks with with a couple of breaks. 20 levels in to 50 weeks give 2.5 weeks per level in order to get there.

But at the end of the day, how fast you give out XP is up to you and your group. I would advise not frustrating them though.

#54

Brock_Landers

Aug 23, 2014 1:50:00

I gave up on XP after about a year of DMing 3rd Ed, now just level up the party when we all feel it's appropriate.

#55

mellored

Aug 23, 2014 8:28:29

seti wrote:

#56

JohnLynch

Aug 23, 2014 8:29:18

I'm not finding it too slow actually. We're gaining 1 level per session thus far which is about the rate we got it in Pathfinder. We play around 8 hour sessions each month so in a year (at the current rate) we'll hit level 12 after 12 months.

As has been mentioned though, using an XP chart from prior editions will also work. Or dispense with it entirely. I personally like XP though.

As for level preference, I realised I prefer levels 1-8 with 4th ed (combat got too slow) and levels 1-9 with Pathfinder if I'm DMing (players got too powerful). I'll wait and see what my preference is with 5th edition.

Keen Man wrote:

#57

Mistwell

Aug 23, 2014 9:45:40

Emerikol. wrote:

#58

Emirikol

Aug 23, 2014 11:08:18

I'd toss the x.p system entirely anyways. It is simply about killing monsters (and anything else is just "optional," but i argue that D&D is geared 97% as a system, and in scenarios, towards combat.) So, why bother accounting x.p. anyways?

A reasonable advancement would be four 4-hour game sessions per level (on average).

Then, when it is time, finish your campaign and start a new one. Most DMs drag campaigns on waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too long anyways. X.P. doesn't have to be a hard rule. Advance as you see necessary.