3.5 How does leveling up work in general?

[vageta31]

I'm starting my first pnp D&D session soon and I'm curious as to how DMs treat leveling up? My experience has always been with video games, where you basically hit your exp requirement and *poof*, you get your new level and skills. So when I talk to my DM about multi-classing and such he brings up the idea that you can't simply jump from some class to another class without training with someone who knows, or the like. Which makes sense... you can't really start out as a rogue then all the sudden become a sorcerer in an instant.

So do most GM's require their players to do some sort of roleplaying in a town or something to recruit training from those they want to learn skills from? Or do most just allow you to level up as you wish without trying to rationalize it in game? Seems if you had party members that had similar abilities you could simply ask them for training, stay close to them during encounters to sort of learn what they're doing. But what if no one in your party has anything near what you want to train in?

[DragonOfUndeath]

I usually have them tell me their next level in advance and have them RP developing that. For Multiclassing to Sorc have them do small things for a big effort. When they level something clicks and they can do it with less effort and more effect

[RndmNumGen]

My main DM usually requires the following:

1) Reasoning for the multiclass that fits within the character concept. Having the character focus on improving his power is valid, assuming it fits the character and the class he's taking.
2) Development of the skills needed by the class; He won't let someone suddenly decide to take a level of barbarian when they get the EXP, but he will let someone train with sparring in order to ready themselves to take a level of barbarian.
3) Don't over-class. Going even beyond the standard EXP penalty for multiclassing, he generally won't allow characters taking more than 3 classes(including PRCs) unless they have a REALLY good reason for it or clear it with him beforehand.

A little stringent, but I find them perfectly acceptable given his games focus more on roleplay and less on combat. When I DM, I generally only require number 1, though if one of my players wants something non-core they need to clear it with me before they level.

[vageta31]

Thanks for the answers, I really couldn't find anything on the web about this sort of thing. I think mine will be somewhat easy, simply multi-classing Rogue to Swashbuckler. Since they share a lot of the same skills and fighting styles I think I can probably just do some extra physical training, maybe work with our party fighter. He's a half-orc but maybe I can test out my bluff/diplomacy skills to trick him into thinking it's very important :P

I'll also be fitting it within my character concept and background. When I started bringing up variant classes, like Swashbuckler/Shield of Blades, is when he mentioned the training part. I guess I really have to come up with a good training method if I want to take the Arcane Stunt variant down the line.

[Starbuck_II]

I'm starting my first pnp D&D session soon and I'm curious as to how DMs treat leveling up? My experience has always been with video games, where you basically hit your exp requirement and *poof*, you get your new level and skills. So when I talk to my DM about multi-classing and such he brings up the idea that you can't simply jump from some class to another class without training with someone who knows, or the like. Which makes sense... you can't really start out as a rogue then all the sudden become a sorcerer in an instant.

So do most GM's require their players to do some sort of roleplaying in a town or something to recruit training from those they want to learn skills from? Or do most just allow you to level up as you wish without trying to rationalize it in game? Seems if you had party members that had similar abilities you could simply ask them for training, stay close to them during encounters to sort of learn what they're doing. But what if no one in your party has anything near what you want to train in?

Really, it varies widely.

Some people see classes as professions, others as a metagame only class features, and so on.

The profession viewers require training/finding others. The Class feature viewers don't because finding another would be metagaming as no one is actually calls themselves a fighter.

But still you do need a decent reason for the multiclass.
Most GMs require you to get back to town to level up. Mostly because they would rather you not level up in middle of dungeon.

[Greenish]

2) Development of the skills needed by the class; He won't let someone suddenly decide to take a level of barbarian when they get the EXP, but he will let someone train with sparring in order to ready themselves to take a level of barbarian.I don't know about barbarians specifically, that's never felt like it's training in so much as "just happens" when the ferociously boiling anger in your head clicks on place and you start to fight like a madman.

Much like how I see being sorcerer: one day, something just "clicks" and you'll manifest your innate powers, but no amount of schooling can bring them out from someone without the knack.

For, say, a wizard, training makes more sense.

[sonofzeal]

I'm starting my first pnp D&D session soon and I'm curious as to how DMs treat leveling up? My experience has always been with video games, where you basically hit your exp requirement and *poof*, you get your new level and skills. So when I talk to my DM about multi-classing and such he brings up the idea that you can't simply jump from some class to another class without training with someone who knows, or the like. Which makes sense... you can't really start out as a rogue then all the sudden become a sorcerer in an instant.

So do most GM's require their players to do some sort of roleplaying in a town or something to recruit training from those they want to learn skills from? Or do most just allow you to level up as you wish without trying to rationalize it in game? Seems if you had party members that had similar abilities you could simply ask them for training, stay close to them during encounters to sort of learn what they're doing. But what if no one in your party has anything near what you want to train in?
Are classes in-game or out-of-game? Does Butch McMann declare to the world that he's a Fighter? Does Stealthy McNinja put "Rogue" on his resume? To people point at Multiclass McHybrid and call him a Bard/Ranger?

If not (and either way is valid), then why should a player go to special lengths to RP a multiclass? PC's gain new abilities all the time either way. One day the Rogue couldn't sense danger behind him, next day he can. One day the Fighter couldn't use Spiked Chains, next day he can. One day the Ranger or Paladin couldn't cast spells, next day he can. Why is it any different if the power came from a different class? Why is a Rogue/Ranger/Fighter any more exotic than a pure rogue or pure ranger or pure fighter?

That's the thing, most multiclass characters make some sort of sense by themselves. I can't think of any I've played who didn't fit some sort of role or other, even the ones who had levels in five different things. Sometimes it's just that role you're aiming for is really specialized - "master of the flail", or "leader of men" or "warpriest of Odin" or "twisted mutant".

But is there any reason why these more obscure paths should be any less respected than the Core classes?



As to levelling, we generally do every second session. Or every session, if you're 2 or more behind.

[DwarfFighter]

So when I talk to my DM about multi-classing and such he brings up the idea that you can't simply jump from some class to another class without training with someone who knows, or the like. Which makes sense... you can't really start out as a rogue then all the sudden become a sorcerer in an instant.


I leave it to my players to justify for themselves. Sure, it would help the atmosphere of the game if they planned their next few character levels ahead of time, just to give the impression that they were growing into their new skill sets. But it's not something I'd want to enforce.

It's not like how you level up your character is anybody else's business.

-DF

[Curmudgeon]

There are plenty of rules in the game for what requirements need to be met to gain a level, and the order in which the level advancement steps occur (Player's Handbook on pages 58-59), so I don't see any good coming from adding more rules. I assume the characters have been working at learning new capabilities during their spare time, and leveling up just represents a certain minimum amount of effort that's already been accomplished.

[Ossian]

If you have read R E Howard you d never allow levels in Barbarian unless it was taken as the 1st level. What gives you the "toughness of whalebone, the iron thews and endurance" of the Cimmerian, or the ability to "keep fighting like a legion of demons where lesser men would have fallen in an instant" etc etc seems to come mostly from your upbringing.

I also like the "prestige core classes" from UA (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/prestigiousCharacterClasses.htm)

Generally, I let the players do whatever they want and roleplay / fight / roleplay the fight at leisure. When the new level XP threshold is crossed, we look back and decide what they can or must take.

I agree on sorceror's having the "powers awakening". More martial classes (monk, ranger, fighter) require training. Paladin and Cleric can be a combination of events, circumstances, natural gifts and training. All other arcanes require a master of some kind, and extensive training (at the very least , several months).

O.

[archon_huskie]

I divide the game up into chapters. PCs spend their XP inbetween chapters. In games that have point buys for attribtues, skills, and magic powers. For DnD, the XP is spent by leveling up, new skills, attribute boosts, picking the new level, It is during this time that thye would find someone to mentor them in a new class.

[The Glyphstone]

If you have read R E Howard you d never allow levels in Barbarian unless it was taken as the 1st level. What gives you the "toughness of whalebone, the iron thews and endurance" of the Cimmerian, or the ability to "keep fighting like a legion of demons where lesser men would have fallen in an instant" etc etc seems to come mostly from your upbringing.

O.

If you have read R.E. Howard, you wouldn't allow Barbarian levels period:smallbiggrin:, as it's probably the worst class for representing everyone's favorite Cimmerian. How to build him is debated (there was an excellent thread on such recently), but most agreed that Barbarian wasn't it.

[LikeAD6]

I just do it Elder Scrolls style: new levels come into effect after taking an extended rest. Multiclassing requires the character to train for a few days, then take an extended rest.

[Starbuck_II]

If you have read R.E. Howard, you wouldn't allow Barbarian levels period:smallbiggrin:, as it's probably the worst class for representing everyone's favorite Cimmerian. How to build him is debated (there was an excellent thread on such recently), but most agreed that Barbarian wasn't it.

+1 to Glyphstone.
Conan wasn't a real barbarian. He was too skilled and wore heavy armor occassionally.
At best you could say the movie version was a barbarian.

[hamishspence]

At some moments in various Conan stories, we do see him make a "burst of strength" which might be compared to a Barbarian Rage- but generally- it wouldn't be much- he's much more rogue-ish or fighter-ish in his style.

"Conan the thief" seems to be one of the more common descriptions of him.

One barbarian level and a whole lot of other class levels is the most I would do for him.

[Eric Mac]

Words have meanings. You can't just change meanings to suit yourself. Otherwise born carbon fligaments Xyeon palar.

This is the funniest and truest thing I've read on here...

[Kane0]

In my group a level up is always awarded at the end of a session, so we can do all the changes and such over the break between them.

For those that don't want to bother RPing it then the DM announces a 'Ding' sound resounding from the character in question at some point during a rest period.
For those that do the RP thing we usually find an appropriate development to make use of from the previous session or early on in the next one, for example getting one's hands on a relevant book to study, getting some good practice in or acquiring the benefits of some sort of teacher.

[Rhynn]

If you have read R E Howard you d never allow levels in Barbarian unless it was taken as the 1st level. What gives you the "toughness of whalebone, the iron thews and endurance" of the Cimmerian, or the ability to "keep fighting like a legion of demons where lesser men would have fallen in an instant" etc etc seems to come mostly from your upbringing.

I have (every last Howard Conan story; got them in my shelf right now), and I do. The "Barbarian" class is just a collection of features, and can be used to represent all sorts of things: pit-fighter, really angry thug, reckless warrior, etc. It could fit e.g. a viking bearsark (who learns to enter the rage, i.e. takes the barbarian lever later), or a knight like "Sir" Turquine. Heck, Gutts of Berserk probably started out as Fighter 1-2 and then went Barbarian (and then Frenzied Berserker, I suppose, although that's largely the armor).

There's countless reasons someone might fight in a rage and be really tough.

Edit:


At some moments in various Conan stories, we do see him make a "burst of strength" which might be compared to a Barbarian Rage- but generally- it wouldn't be much- he's much more rogue-ish or fighter-ish in his style.

Conan is frequently overtaken by a "red mist" when he fights most desperately, e.g. in Xuthal of the Dusk (The Slithering Shadow) where he fights Thog.

Actually, that reminds me: Drizzt Do'Urden (bleah) pretty much starts out as a Fighter, goes Barbarian, then Ranger.


Conan wasn't a real barbarian. He was too skilled and wore heavy armor occassionally.
At best you could say the movie version was a barbarian.

Conan is explicitly a barbarian; or, rather, the class is explicitly modelled on him, although by way of several incarnations (AD&D 1E, AD&D 2E). Conan himself would probably be a barbarian/fighter/rogue. (In the Conan d20 game, he's a barbarian/soldier/thief/pirate.) He comes from a barbaric hinterland, he enters rages, he's the toughest around, he's got wilderness skills... He mostly wears helmets and chain shirts, maybe hauberks; medium armor. More commonly, he's clad in nothing but a loincloth or e.g. pantaloons. By the time he wears heavy armor - the full plate in The Hour of the Dragon - he's obviously taken several fighter levels.

And being "skilled" is in no way antithetical to being a barbarian; that's a ridiculous idea. No one who isn't skilled with a weapon is going to last very many fights against people who are.

[Slipperychicken]

I could see Conan more like a Fighter (or rather what a Fighter should have been). He doesn't typically enter a screaming blood frenzy at all, preferring to use his wits and skill at arms.



So do most GM's require their players to do some sort of roleplaying in a town or something to recruit training from those they want to learn skills from? Or do most just allow you to level up as you wish without trying to rationalize it in game? Seems if you had party members that had similar abilities you could simply ask them for training, stay close to them during encounters to sort of learn what they're doing. But what if no one in your party has anything near what you want to train in?

The game expects you to level up during downtime* (i.e. spend a week or two in town training), but I think video-game mechanics helped make instantaneous leveling more acceptable.

*One example is the wizards spells class feature saying that they learn their spells between adventures.

[MukkTB]

My group allows taking a level in anything on level up. However we strongly encourage some degree of roleplay to set the stage. Suddenly becoming a Wizard looks a bit better if you've acquired a book and had a few lessons beforehand.

[Amaril]

In my opinion, it should all depend on what makes the most logical sense for what the player wants to do. Ideally, I'd have my players let me know in advance what they want to do with their character the next time they level, and depending on how different the abilities they want are from the ones they already have, I'd either just let them have it or work it into the story over the course of the next few adventures. If my rogue wanted to put more points in Thievery so they could be better at picking locks, or my evoker wizard wanted to learn fireball, I'd just assume they're practicing and developing their new abilities as they adventure, and let them have it when they leveled without worrying about it. On the other hand, if my fighter told me they were planning on taking a level of druid, I'd make it a requirement that they be inducted into some druidic order or another and receive the requisite training, since the skillsets of fighters and druids don't really overlap much.
There are things that fit somewhere in between, of course. If the same fighter said they wanted to spend a feat on a new weapon proficiency, I'd probably make them pick up the weapon in question and carry it around for a while, but just assume that they're practicing with it during downtime and working it into the fighting techniques they're already familiar with. Explained, but not so vital that an entire quest must be devoted to it. Conversely, if someone wanted to become a sorcerer, I wouldn't make them do anything themselves, but I'd incorporate an event into the game sometime in the future that saw them awakening their latent magical abilities.

[Lanaya]

Levelling up in my campaigns happens in the downtime between adventures. If you want to fluff it as just suddenly learning new abilities, go ahead. If you want to fluff it as seeking out a mentor to teach you their ways, that's fine too. I don't see the appeal of forcing people to do it one way or the other, demanding that they instantly gain their new powers video game style when they want to roleplay out their training and discoveries seems a bit unfair, and forcing someone to roleplay things and find a mentor when they don't want to is just going to lead to half-hearted attempts that add nothing to the game.

[nedz]

Did you guys not spot the Spambot Necromancer in post 16 ?

[archon_huskie]

yews, but he's quoting my sig. that makes it AWESOME!

[nedz]

Hmm, maybe he's not a spambot — though it is getting hard to tell these days.

Still necromancy though. :smallsigh: