Leveling

[bobpartdeux]

I am not sure if I like the leveling scheme in D20 games

it goes by way to fast, especially when taking on monsters in DnD

but people like to grow their characters, so it is important that they don't play half a year without advancing their character any

so basically I think that it would be a good idea to as you gain XP (at a possible faster rate than 1K a year, but not at the level of DnD (1K a day)) also gain some of the skills and the like that you are going towards to take a level

these would of course have to be the ones that you were training towards

in a way this would take away levels, which might be needlessly complicating things

JOn Miller

 

[veltyen]

If you read the leveling scheme details it basically comes down to "the GM decides" this is obfuscated by a large number of tables, equations and other details that seem important. They aren't.

When it comes down to it the GM decides at what rate and how the players advance. A rate that will keep your players happy, balanced versus the need to rebalance the rest of the universe each time the players advance. There are many rules of thumb about this, but the above is the core concept.

Methods that I have used that can be successful:-

No advancement. Sounds harsh, but for a 5-10 session game is perfectly reasonable, and anything less then 3 or 4 sessions is nearly always the way to go. If the players really want to advance their characters and number crunch level advancement, they are happy to do that on their own time.

XP based advancement. XP rewards are determined by GM fiat, hidden behind guidelines and the success of the players. Even ammounts work well, but will never close the gap between lower and higher level party members. Even with extras works very well, and gives a meta-gaming tool to encourage good behaviour (whether that is good roleplaying or sexual favors is depends completely on the GM).

Alternate advancement: Seperated from XP, level advancement is only directly related to the GM's say so. The GM decides when people go up a level. This could be as simple as everyone going up a level at the end of a storyline. The rate of advancement is then controlled by the GM. If you split advancement (ie, only some players level) to avoid player antagonism some kind of voting method can reduce the `unfairness` that may be perceived. Make the voting hidden and suddenly it is GM fiat again.

The method I am going to use for my current Traveller game is a variant XP based variant with player participation. The players nominate 3 other players (it is a 7 PC game). Everyone gets an ammount of XP equal to (GM decided equal ammount) + (another arbritary ammount, probably 500 XP) * number of votes, tweaked for player current level.

Looking at the rate of XP that players get during prior history it maxes out at 20,000 per 4 year term (Maximum decoration -8k, commision -2k, promotion -1k, Max XP bonus -4k, survival -4k, purple heart -1k) which at 5000 a year is probably a good benchmark. You could assume that most of the time in a service was spent getting from one place to another, doing general maintenance, training and the other minutae of life. If you run a couple of sessions, and downtime the rest of the player experience (minimum 10 days to get anywhere helps in this regard) over a year the 5k target would not be that hard to acheive.

Apologies for the meta-gaming-theory tangent.

Regards
Veltyen

 

[marvo]

At higher levels a few 1000xp is not going to be making a lot of difference to your characters levels. I generally try and give enough XP per adventure for everyone to level. By adventure I mean several sessions over weeks (or months). Setting XP rewards for certain adventure goals works well. I also give Ad-Hoc XP based on exceptional role playing, good ideas etc etc. For the slower skill gaining classes I sometimes give them a free level 1 in a skill if they have been trying to learn it, or got really lucky with the die roll.
Overall if you have players who ask 'How many XP did we get?" at the end of each session, then you have the wrong players. Just recently I ran for 4 weeks and totally forgot XP. But, nobody asked until after the adventure was over. It's more of a 'what have I learnt from this adventure' than a 'How many XP do I get?'.
XP and leveling is a game mechanic. If it doesn't suit you and your players, change it.

 

[Psion]

Originally posted by bobpartdeux:
I am not sure if I like the leveling scheme in D20 games

it goes by way to fast, especially when taking on monsters in DnD

d20 games =/= D&D. A given d20 game need not share D&D's rate of advancement or criteria. In fact, most don't (even the D&D DMG offers flurries of alternatives.

but people like to grow their characters, so it is important that they don't play half a year without advancing their character any

so basically I think that it would be a good idea to as you gain XP (at a possible faster rate than 1K a year, but not at the level of DnD (1K a day)) also gain some of the skills and the like that you are going towards to take a level

That's backwards AFAIAC. I'd make them get the level, then get the skills or feats.

I did consider implementing training rules, because I sort of miss the aspect of characters keeping themselves busy by training between adventures from MT.

There are a set of training rules to this effect in the DMG that could be adapted for this purpose.

 

[Drakon]

I see Xps and leveling as kind of like earning points to buy skills and such. I would like to see levels just cut, as it is too abstract and too game mechanicy for me. It does not relate to the real world very well. I mean, what class and level are you in the real world?

 

[Morte]

Originally posted by Drakon:
I see Xps and leveling as kind of like earning points to buy skills and such. I would like to see levels just cut, as it is too abstract and too game mechanicy for me. It does not relate to the real world very well.

Fair enough, but remember that realism and gaming don't always mix too well.

And yes the levels are "game mechanicy", that's what they're there for. By bundling things up into pricing packages ("you can have high BAB if you take low skills" etc etc) they balance the game. This is why T20 balances and scales so much better than more open (i.e. min-maxable) systems like GURPS or T5 quickgen.

Of course, lots of people don't care about balance much and they have less reason to play T20.

I mean, what class and level are you in the real world?

Your class and level aren't your job description, like they were in 1e D&D, they're more like a quick at-a-glance summary of your skills list.

If you spent a couple of years working as a bodyguard for a mob boss and came out of it with rogue 1/mercenary 1 it doesn't mean you worked as a rogue for a year then went and worked in a different part of the organisation as a mercenary for a year. It means the skills you learned over those two years were best modelled by a mix of the rogue and mercenary classes.

 

[Psion]

Originally posted by Drakon:
I see Xps and leveling as kind of like earning points to buy skills and such. I would like to see levels just cut, as it is too abstract and too game mechanicy for me. It does not relate to the real world very well. I mean, what class and level are you in the real world?

Navy 3 / Academic 3.

Really, I don't think its as unrealistic as some people make out. No, we don't really advance in chunks. However, I like that it controls the max on your skills and forces you to spread out. In the real world, in my job I don't just learn that one uber skill I feel like maxing out. I get competancy is a variety of skills. I don't think systems that let you put an unlimited amount of points wherever you want are too realistic.

 

[Drakon]

I agree, and that is not what I am talking about. You take the raw XP awards from the game, and use that to buy the skills you want. Over and done with, and none of this level stuff. Some skills would cost more than others, but hey, thats life.

Or game, but then life is a game, or is it the other way around....

Navy 3? what was your rate/rank?

 

[clementk]

Originally posted by Drakon:
I agree, and that is not what I am talking about. You take the raw XP awards from the game, and use that to buy the skills you want. Over and done with, and none of this level stuff.

I think what you're wanting to get rid of is classes then. Or at the least levels in a class, not limitations on power. If you haven't taken a look at Mutants and Masterminds I recommend you do so.

Point based chargen and even then you can ditch "power levels" if you like. Just plug in T20 skills, feats, and add saving throw adjustments as a "power". You can change BAB to three combat skills while you're at it. Take the XP, buy your skills etc. done.

I've considered allowing this in the Endeavor game I co-GM as an option for players who are mainly used to point-based systems though you wouldn't have to ditch prior history.

Casey

 

[clementk]

Originally posted by bobpartdeux:
so basically I think that it would be a good idea to as you gain XP (at a possible faster rate than 1K a year, but not at the level of DnD (1K a day)) also gain some of the skills and the like that you are going towards to take a level

While T20 has IMO a better XP advancement rate and reward than D&D (adventure / job based) if you want what you're suggesting is the flipside of Omega World's setting aside of skill points and feat slots gained from a leveling up until after game sessions.

i.e. if the person is training or has used a skill etc. they can spend unspent skill points on the skill then. No waiting until the next level up.

Casey

 

[Psion]

Originally posted by Drakon:
I agree, and that is not what I am talking about. You take the raw XP awards from the game, and use that to buy the skills you want. Over and done with, and none of this level stuff. Some skills would cost more than others, but hey, thats life.

Well, I do feel that is what I am talking about, and I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think spending points wherever you feel like it doesn't feel like real life.

Navy 3? what was your rate/rank?

Nuke ET2. Passed the first exam, but got out before I got to wear it.

 

[Highguard]

We used to level insanely fast as well, until we re read the rules on exp rewards: its devided by the number of characters in the party.

If one mob = 100 exp for a level 5 character, its only worth 20 exp if you have 5 level 5 characters in the party. At that point we slowed down conciderably.

Normally it takes between 3 to 5 sessions of 4 hours each for our party to get a level. This is mitigated by the fact that 2/3 of our group of 6 is well over 30 and we chew up about 30 min or so per game session talking about real world stuff.

As to what I am IRL: hmmm....let's see: 1/2 term academic 10 years Navy (2.5 terms) with Combat Action award, Mustered out at E-5 (FC2 (sw), mustering out with 2 +1's to Edu and no cash rolls, {Gunnery 5, Electronics 7, Engineering 1, Sensors 1, Navigation 1, Damage control 2, Pistol 5, Awareness 3, Combat armor 1, Military police 3} 1.5 terms Specialist (electronics) {+1 to electronics, Security systems 2, Fire Alarm systems 2}

Dosen't include all those skills I learned as a parent tho...things like etect dirty diaper, and Spot Tired child...

peace out

 

[jasper]

Originally posted by Drakon:
I see Xps and leveling as kind of like earning points to buy skills and such. I would like to see levels just cut, as it is too abstract and too game mechanicy for me. It does not relate to the real world very well. I mean, what class and level are you in the real world?

Started at 18
Ok army sp4 cook so army pmos cook low tech world 1 term service Call it
2nd level.
Air Guard 1.5 terms. Ground radio tech Call it
3rd level.
Professional 11 + programmer bump that to 12 years 3 terms
3 terms + 1 + 1.5 terms 5.5 terms
Currently 40 years old. So I must failed or just had lots of garrison duty.
call it Army 3/ professional 2.