Xp gain

[Baby Gary]

I'm am thinking of creating a campaign and the story is that the PCs start out as mediocre in wherever they do (around 5th level) and it progress until they, well finish the campaign. I personally think that the time between levels is to much and also I think that my PCs will want to get to those nice high levels fast so I was thinking about messing with XP gain. I am thinking of doubling the XP gain/cost for everything except leveling up, so PCs will level up twice as fast but that making that wand or staff will cost twice as much, do you think that this will work and do you think that I should do it?

Thanks, Baby Gary

[Gildedragon]

Just close in the level gaps. 750*current level or even 500*cl is not bad

[frogglesmash]

I think a simpler way of doing it would be to use a checkpoint system for leveling so you have complete control over the rate at which it happens, and remove crafting xp costs entirely. If you think that makes crafting to rest you could convert the xp cost to gp costs using the conversion rates found in the DMG.

[Baby Gary]

what is the "checkpoint system"?

[frogglesmash]

what is the "checkpoint system"?

You just level up all your PCs at certain points where you feel it's appropriate. I like it because it removes the temptation to kill everything for xp.

[WarKitty]

what is the "checkpoint system"?

Basically, you get levels for finishing goals, rather than for reaching a certain amount of XP.

[Baby Gary]

I am not entirely sure that I can do this well, should I do something like keeping track of how much XP the players would have and then leveling them up when they reach the correct xp level (I would do something like multiply the xp requirements per level by 3/4)?

[Bakkan]

Usually the checkpoint system ignores the XP the characters would have gotten. Instead, the GM gives the characters a level once they finish a quest (or part of a quest)

[tedcahill2]

I am not entirely sure that I can do this well, should I do something like keeping track of how much XP the players would have and then leveling them up when they reach the correct xp level (I would do something like multiply the xp requirements per level by 3/4)?

It's a more "cinematic" approach to leveling up. Let's say you're group is hired to track down the runaway daughter of duke. They find out she's in some town, they go there but find out she's been kidnapped and taken to a smugglers den in a cave outside town. Upon getting to the cave they find that the kidnappers were ambush and killed by some trolls that wanted to make the cave their home, the daughter is still alive, being kept until the trolls get hungry again. They save her from the troll and return her to her father.

Now under the current system you tally up all the XP the group earns along the way and maybe they level up at some point. Using a checkpoint system you would simply decide that they will earn a level for successfully rescuing the daughter. It doesn't matter how or what happens or who they fight or anything. You just give them a level after the mission.

[WarKitty]

It's a more "cinematic" approach to leveling up. Let's say you're group is hired to track down the runaway daughter of duke. They find out she's in some town, they go there but find out she's been kidnapped and taken to a smugglers den in a cave outside town. Upon getting to the cave they find that the kidnappers were ambush and killed by some trolls that wanted to make the cave their home, the daughter is still alive, being kept until the trolls get hungry again. They save her from the troll and return her to her father.

Now under the current system you tally up all the XP the group earns along the way and maybe they level up at some point. Using a checkpoint system you would simply decide that they will earn a level for successfully rescuing the daughter. It doesn't matter how or what happens or who they fight or anything. You just give them a level after the mission.

Right. One major advantage of this system is that it rewards players for however they manage or even avoid challenges - beating the trolls and sneaking past them net the same reward.

[Sagetim]

It can also be used to encourage role playing and character development. Now, that also requires you to want to run the kind of game where they are running into intrigue and covert plots and political sitations where a simple stabbing may not be a viable solution. But, in those games, it can be a lot easier to have a milestone system giving the players levels (or a steady 'you have survived the machinations of the political elite for a few sessions, have another level') than trying to adjudicate how much xp a talking only encounter against a highly specialized but low level noble with a lot of resources and connections might be.

Also, I just wanted to say: damn, if you consider level 5 to be mediocre, I wouldn't mind being a player in that game. I mean, sure the world might be rather more dangerous, but it would also imply that spells like raise dead would be easier to find someone to cast if necessary.

[mistermysterio]

Another benefit of this system is that all of your players should be the same level (since they all gain a level at the same time) and your players do not need to keep track of experience at all (nor do you). Basically, you decide when you want them to level up... and if things are progressing too slowly or too quickly, you, as DM, have the power to increase or decrease the speed at which levels are gained at will.

[ngilop]

I agree that the checkpoint system would be the best for you right now, and I am not really a fan of that particular style. I guess its just the fact of me writing down numbers on the spaced marked EXP than anything else.

But, I feel the other posters in the thread while have given definitions of checkpoint leveling. They have failed to give examples on what it should entail. Something I feel that goes a long way to making a point more clear.

so here is my example.
PC start at 5th level, and hear from the barkeep that local farmers are complaining of cattle going missing. PCs investigate find out its Ogres who are stealing the cattle for food to feed an army for a Frost Giant Jarl. and proceed to work up the chain to kill the frost giant
Upon clearing out the ogre den returning the cattle and finding out the 'why' the PCs gain their 6th level
Tracking the ogre war boss' fortress and taking him out nets them 7th level
They then hear of a missing trade wagon and investigate to find it taken by Gnolls
They clear out the main gnoll den (gaining 8th level) finding out the jarl is in talk via a delegate with their high shaman currently
Making their way through the woods and into the mountain cave that is the 'temple' they kill the shaman but the frost giant delegate manages to get away-they are now 9th level.
Contact with a fortress near the northern border has stopped, and the PCs imagine it I related to the jarl.
going to investigate they spend the next 3 (10th, 11th and 12th) levels clearing the fortress of a mismatch band of hooligans led by frost giants with the previous delegate at the helm. from the fortress and then defending it from an arriving band of elite frost giants with caster support
They find out the plan of the Jarl, to get a mystical item that can summon extra-planar minions to give him an endless army.
They head to where the item is, clear it out of guardians and traps and end up destroying said item now they are 13th level.

The jarl still has a big enough army to end the kingdom, not outright BUT weaken it enough that it falls. They go to the frost giant jarl is headquartered and spend 2 levels (14th and 15Th) getting there and clearing it out so they are 15th level by the time they face the jarl.

[Baby Gary]

I think that this will really work with my campaign idea. the general idea is unite all the warring factions to beat the armies of hell(or the abyss, I can't member)

[weckar]

Right. One major advantage of this system is that it rewards players for however they manage or even avoid challenges - beating the trolls and sneaking past them net the same reward.Doesn't the normal system do that? :smallconfused:

You've overcome the troll encounter either way, so you get exp according to their CR.

[WarKitty]

Doesn't the normal system do that? :smallconfused:

You've overcome the troll encounter either way, so you get exp according to their CR.

Technically, yes.

Practically, in the current system, few DM's reward "we found a different route that bypassed the trolls altogether."

[ngilop]

Technically, yes.

Practically, in the current system, few DM's reward "we found a different route that bypassed the trolls altogether."

There is a massive MASSIVE difference between sneaking past and bypassing altogether.

Would you give EXP for a party for walking by a mausoleum? normally it is an optional loot/exp grind. But just going around it I feel should net you the EXP rewards for that.

[WarKitty]

There is a massive MASSIVE difference between sneaking past and bypassing altogether.

Would you give EXP for a party for walking by a mausoleum? normally it is an optional loot/exp grind. But just going around it I feel should net you the EXP rewards for that.

I think it depends on what the goal is. Suppose the goal was to get an object out of the mausoleum. The normal way would be to go through the mausoleum, kill a bunch of undead, gain experience, and then get the object. But a party could also scry the object, tunnel under the mausoleum, dig into the room with the object, and get out.

In a standard XP system, they probably don't get the same amount of XP, since they bypassed most of the fights. In a goal-based system, they very well might, because the goal was "retrieve the object" and they retrieved it.

[ngilop]

I think it depends on what the goal is. Suppose the goal was to get an object out of the mausoleum. The normal way would be to go through the mausoleum, kill a bunch of undead, gain experience, and then get the object. But a party could also scry the object, tunnel under the mausoleum, dig into the room with the object, and get out.

In a standard XP system, they probably don't get the same amount of XP, since they bypassed most of the fights. In a goal-based system, they very well might, because the goal was "retrieve the object" and they retrieved it.

again.. there is a difference between sneaking pass and avoiding something altogether.

If the goal is 'get the object. also.. said object is in mausoleum' and they find a creative way to get said object GRATS you get exp. but if as you are saying they completely avoid the goal completion altogether why should they get EXP?

[WarKitty]

again.. there is a difference between sneaking pass and avoiding something altogether.

If the goal is 'get the object. also.. said object is in mausoleum' and they find a creative way to get said object GRATS you get exp. but if as you are saying they completely avoid the goal completion altogether why should they get EXP?

I'm not saying that. I'm saying they get xp as long as they get the goal. In my example, "deal with the trolls" wasn't the goal. It was a possible challenge on the way to the goal. Most XP systems, however, if the players find a way to avoid the troll encounter completely rather than go through it, won't give out XP.

[ngilop]

Ok. my bad it is just semantics getting in the way of us communicating. I apologize

it just first you stated the sneaking pass thing (or better defined of alternate route to achieve the same end goal) as deserving EXP which I agree with wholeheartedly.

but then you went on that avoiding said goal altogether was worthy of EXP as well that is when I posted my counter point.

Misunderstanding that when you say avoid altogether you were still actually meaning 'sneaking pass'

and for me sneaking pass ( alternoute route to end goal) is vastly different than bypassing altogether.

I apologize.