In-game Rationale for Leveling?

[imaginary]

Hi all,

How can I make leveling a bit more realistic in-game?

When a wizard levels, suddenly they know more spells. When or how did they learn them? When a monk levels, suddenly they know or learn some new technique. For classes with abilities granted by supernatural beings or power, sure, additional ‘gifts’ make sense. But what about for the rest, how can you provide in-game, role-playing oriented rationale or explanations for leveling without requiring a lot of training? How do you explain new powers, feats, abilities?

Do you just say the fighter has been practicing some technique for a long time, and suddenly figures it out? Do wizards suddenly have epiphanies? Thoughts?

Thanks,

imaginary.

[Fri]

In say, Legend of the Wulin (I think there are some other systmes as well) you don't just spontaneously gain level and gain new abilities even if you get enough xp to level up. You get enough experience to level up, and then at the end of the current adventure you spend some time wrestling bears in a mountain or studying swordmanship with your teacher or learning new spells or whatever for a while, then you arrive at the next adventure with your new level and all of your new abilities you got from your training/learning sessions.

My friends thought that training session is stupid and waste of time though, and prefer that they just get those new abilities.

[Findulidas]

I think this is one of the times when you shouldnt overthink it. Having sudden changes comes with a leveling system. You have to remember that much of it all is just abstractions to set how the game is played out. This should be an acceptable diffrence from reality. I guess you could say its a sudden realization, training that reaches the level that its practically applicable, a finding that gives a breakthrough or whatever.

[Lombra]

There are optional rules in the DMG, one of them is that when you gain enough experience to level up you need to spend downtime to train and gain the new abilities. I like it because it uses gold, for which there isn't much mechanical use in this edition.

[Arkhios]

Hi all,

How can I make leveling a bit more realistic in-game?

When a wizard levels, suddenly they know more spells. When or how did they learn them? When a monk levels, suddenly they know or learn some new technique. For classes with abilities granted by supernatural beings or power, sure, additional ‘gifts’ make sense. But what about for the rest, how can you provide in-game, role-playing oriented rationale or explanations for leveling without requiring a lot of training? How do you explain new powers, feats, abilities?

Do you just say the fighter has been practicing some technique for a long time, and suddenly figures it out? Do wizards suddenly have epiphanies? Thoughts?

Thanks,

imaginary.

You might be interested in checking out the variant rule from DMG p.131: Training to gain levels.

As a DM, if that's how you want it to work, then it's final. Your friends will agree with it eventually, as it adds realism to the game.
Sudden level ups fit for a CRPG and/or MMORPG and, in my honest opinion, they should stay there.

[JellyPooga]

You might be interested in checking out the variant rule from DMG p.131: Training to gain levels.

As a DM, if that's how you want it to work, then it's final. Your friends will agree with it eventually, as it adds realism to the game.
Sudden level ups fit for a CRPG and/or MMORPG and, in my honest opinion, they should stay there.

This pretty much sums it up. There's no reason a level-based system has to be anything but realistic in this regard. No more or less than any other system. As Akhios says; leave "ping" level-ups to the computer games where they belong. Training to achieve your new abilities is not assumed to be the norm in more recent editions, but it was in earlier ones; it was just often overlooked in favour of a more "instant gratification" style of game.

[some guy]

I just assume every character does a bit of training, researching, heavy soul-searching during short and long rests and the empty time between rests and adventuring. This probably doesn't work when characters level quite fast.

[Unoriginal]

Characters challenge themselves and train as they adventure. At some point, they get a noticeable improvement, like finally managing to cast those spells they've been studying right or having improved enough in endurance that they're tougher now.

[JellyPooga]

Characters challenge themselves and train as they adventure. At some point, they get a noticeable improvement, like finally managing to cast those spells they've been studying right or having improved enough in endurance that they're tougher now.

This kind of "gradual training that suddenly pays off" just doesn't sit right for me. Being better/tougher or knowing a spell you didn't previously after a week of downtime; yeah, that makes a certain kind of sense, but "ping!" levelling in the middle of a dungeon? Nah. Too much of an abstraction. For me, at least. Milage varies, of course.

[McNinja]

Hi all,

How can I make leveling a bit more realistic in-game?

When a wizard levels, suddenly they know more spells. When or how did they learn them? When a monk levels, suddenly they know or learn some new technique. For classes with abilities granted by supernatural beings or power, sure, additional ‘gifts’ make sense. But what about for the rest, how can you provide in-game, role-playing oriented rationale or explanations for leveling without requiring a lot of training? How do you explain new powers, feats, abilities?

Do you just say the fighter has been practicing some technique for a long time, and suddenly figures it out? Do wizards suddenly have epiphanies? Thoughts?

Thanks,

imaginary.
To me, it's the study of new techniques or spells and having a firm grasp of their concepts. A lot of real-life experience is gained purely by doing the thing you're trying to master, rather than simply reading. D&D doesn't quite lay that out and presents it as a "suddenly, you know how to cast fireball" although thinking about the concept for more than 10 seconds makes you realize that your wizard probably spent a few weeks practicing the spell.

I attempted to have my players spend a week in-game studying/training/practicing new features before they could utilize those features, but I didn't enforce it very well and I decided to drop it. I still like the idea though.

[Gryndle]

The variant in the DMG is useful, especially if you need to get rid of some of the PC's gold. But if you actively enforce that they can gain new abilities after downtime training, you are eventually going to run into PCs with enough exp to gain several levels at once. Which means abilities that they have earned are being delayed. And some players might not be appreciative of that if it happens too often.

My players and I make the previous stated assumption that some manner of effort on the PCs part to learn is a relative constant. That is they are either studying, training, or practicing. I assume some manner of this is going on even during long rests during travel (except in hostile territory where the PCs are placing extra efforts on security). And it shows up frequently in the roleplaying aspects of our game.

[Aaron Underhand]

This kind of "gradual training that suddenly pays off" just doesn't sit right for me. Being better/tougher or knowing a spell you didn't previously after a week of downtime; yeah, that makes a certain kind of sense, but "ping!" levelling in the middle of a dungeon? Nah. Too much of an abstraction. For me, at least. Milage varies, of course.

Ever studied the acquisition of skills in the real universe? I've both studied and experienced that learning. Whether it's chess, programming, football or acrobatics people do make step changes in competence. Often you get to the end of a session thinking you're performing worse than before, then next time the situation comes up you find yourself performing at a whole new level.

The abstraction is closer to reality for me than is commonly considered. YMMV.

Edited for grammar.

[smcmike]

The whole leveling system is so many miles away from realism that trying to make it "more realistic" is a fool's errand, in my opinion. It's like trying to make my cat better at algebra.

[Gryndle]

D&D mechanics aren't built to simulate real life's processes of gaining new skill and ability. Trying to make it do so is just like the old HP as meat argument.

Even when we used XP our group had no expectation of leveling up mid-dungeon. I'm not arguing for that (actually I'm not arguing at all). If a PC had enough exp to level, they had to wait until the next long rest. That's a delay most people can live with.

These days my group doesn't use EXP at all. Depending on what has gone on, we usually just gain a level after every two or three sessions, and during either "long rests" or during in-game downtime.

Look at it this way, and from this point of view I think the system comes closest to mimicking reality-a character has been gaining a new level ever since he "leveled up" from the last one, it has been a process (sometimes long, sometimes, short) not a single event. Gaining the level and the new abilities is just the system's way of representing that. To me that makes more sense that the PC having a bag of gold and going to a trainer to gain a level. OOh, I went to see sensei, paid him a bunch and now I know how to throw a wheel-kick! Wee!.

The mindset I oppose is when you have a game where the DM keeps pushing events along, but also requires PCs to use downtime to find trainers etc in order to level-up. If you frequently have PCs with enough exp to gain a level but are unable to access that new level because of your ruling, then maybe that ruling should be looked at again before your player's loose patience or get frustrated.

edited because I included the wrong quote.

[JellyPooga]

Often you get to the end of a session thinking you're performing worse than before, then next time the situation comes up you find yourself performing at a whole new level.

It's that "next time" thing that makes in-dungeon levelling a problem for me. PCs may be training and learning while on an adventure, but it's not until "next time" that they've actually progressed to the next stage and can actually put what they've learned into practice. For me, that at least requires a long rest, if not some actual down-time. Otherwise, we're talking about a chess or football player that has an epiphany mid-game; not that it canct happen, but it shouldn't be the norm.

[cZak]

It's that "next time" thing that makes in-dungeon levelling a problem for me. PCs may be training and learning while on an adventure, but it's not until "next time" that they've actually progressed to the next stage and can actually put what they've learned into practice. For me, that at least requires a long rest, if not some actual down-time. Otherwise, we're talking about a chess or football player that has an epiphany mid-game; not that it canct happen, but it shouldn't be the norm.


I understand your reasoning and can see your point
Mid combat advancement? Yea, I don't see that as reasonable. After a long rest seems plausible.

I've always thought of it as progressing while living.
I think the current system is fine in that regard instead of getting into more minutiae advancement that would seem tedious book keeping to me.
Each class is performing their skills & abilities; wizards are expanding their knowledge, fighters are perfecting their skills. At a point they get that epiphany or perfect that maneuver sufficient to use with minimal error.

As far as the training to advance ideas
I've liked the idea of training downtime for advancement. But I think I've only been in one game where it's been used over thirty years of playing.

My thought was, why adventure.
Characters can ignore the adventuring and just be training. They just level up while studying at the academy or at the training yard of the keep. The party decides to take a break from adventuring at 5th level & just train until they're 9th level, then continue their adventuring.
I guess this could be the basis for starting characters above 1st level.

[MagicMask]

In 4th it was actually stated in the PHB that when you gained enough XP to reach the next level it wouldn't take effect until you had a long rest. I don't remember reading that same thing in 5th but it could easily apply.

Our group has adopted a different practice in that we don't track XP and use a sort of milestone system for leveling. After completing quests/objectives/dungeons the group would gain 1 or more levels as agreed by the group/DM. This means that when we do level it is during some sort of downtime/travel. We didn't do it for the realism but other group factors, but the effect is achieved.

[Samayu]

Ever studied the acquisition of skills in the real universe? I've both studied and experienced that learning. Whether it's chess, programming, football or acrobatics people do make step changes in competence. Often you get to the end of a session thinking you're performing worse than before, then next time the situation comes up you find yourself performing at a whole new level.

The abstraction is closer to reality for me than is commonly considered. YMMV.


I agree with this, for the most part. It makes more sense for some disciplines than others.

We're swinging swords out there every day, so the incremental learning would definitely apply. You don't need to have an epiphany to advance your skill, and it doesn't seem likely to me that such an epiphany would happen back at the ranch. There are combat skills (let's say maneuvers) that in game terms you "suddenly" learn. But how long have you been practicing them? In D&D, combat is an abstraction. Your six-second turn is full of swings, parries, jabs, dodges and other sorts of attempts. You've probably been trying this maneuver for weeks, and you've finally got the hang of it.

It's easy to say that a wizard can't spontaneously learn a fireball when he gains a level. But who's to say she hasn't been working on it for weeks, in between encounters? Thinking (obsessing) about it while walking between towns, even practicing her gestures, or collecting components? Doing test firings near camp before breakfast?

Now how does a monk practice slowing his fall? "Hey, let's stop here for a rest. I want to fling myself from that tree for a while." The problem is you can't do it one way for one class, and another way for another class.

[Magic Myrmidon]

The problem is you can't do it one way for one class, and another way for another class.

Why not? Every class does pretty radically different things, both in universe and mechanically. I wouldn't imagine them to train - or learn - in the same way. For the monk, I'd be ok with quiet introspection unlocking new secrets of his art and the universe as a whole. Thus, he can slow his fall through a mastery of his body and mind, rather than a repetition of the task.

[Waterdeep Merch]

Frankly, the 'ping' system is done because it's more fun that way. I've tried enforcing player training before (back in 3.5, using a nearly identical idea to 5th's training variant), and it's always pissed off my players. They want to be able to get stronger and use new toys. Locking them behind attempts at realism was irksome.

If it bothers you that much from a verisimilitude standpoint, consider that they all probably learned the fundamentals they're now getting around to using a long time ago. A wizard knew what a fireball was years before they could cast it, but only now feel like they grasp the concepts well enough to try it themselves. A sorcerer could feel the untapped potential in their bloodline, and have some idea where it was taking them if only they could get strong enough to use it. A fighter was mentored by an amazing warrior and has been pushing to apply all of the things they had been taught.

Assume there's a lot of off-screen training, too. The characters in-universe have some desire for self-improvement, whether it be a goal unto itself or simple self-preservation. You don't 'suddenly go ping'. You've been through hell and back, surviving dangerous situations and untold odds time and time again, risking your life all the while. This is abstracted in experience points, and further abstracted in leveling up. Both simply measure how far along you've come.

[smcmike]

Another thing to consider - not every level even requires any sort of explanation. Some abilities rise to the level of in-game conscious thought, but many do not.

My barbarian does not know what a hit point is. He did not train to learn Reckless Attack or Danger Sense - he discovered at some point that aggression tends to work, and also developed a bit of useful PTSD after being knocked out every combat (aggression has its price).

[Cybren]

Hi all,

How can I make leveling a bit more realistic in-game?

When a wizard levels, suddenly they know more spells. When or how did they learn them? When a monk levels, suddenly they know or learn some new technique. For classes with abilities granted by supernatural beings or power, sure, additional ‘gifts’ make sense. But what about for the rest, how can you provide in-game, role-playing oriented rationale or explanations for leveling without requiring a lot of training? How do you explain new powers, feats, abilities?

Do you just say the fighter has been practicing some technique for a long time, and suddenly figures it out? Do wizards suddenly have epiphanies? Thoughts?

Thanks,

imaginary.
As a DM, engage in some shared storytelling. When someone levels up and suddenly gains a new ability, ask them how they got it. Was the wizard working on these spells for months and only now got the last bits they needed to use them? Did the fighter have a training montage off screen? Was the monk unwilling to try a technique that they couldn't get in their training but in some moment of crisis they pulled it off? As mentioned, some abilities are abstract enough that you don't have to justify them.

[CaptainSarathai]

In my game, I have them "ding" during long rests.

I run the variant long rest mechanics. I explained to my players why I chose to do this, and they understand; it doesn't make sense to have 6-9 "encounters" per day. So the variant that I use makes Short Rests an 8hr downtime, and Long Rests are 24hr downtime in a "safe area" like a town or castle.
Usually, when the party goes for a long rest, they stay for an average of 2 days, rather than the minimum.

My campaign also heavily features "seasons." I abstract a lot of downtime, travel and resting, so that it burns up time "in world" without becoming tedious.
The DMG and the Downtime UA give a lot of activities which require large amounts of time. Players won't get to utilize these things if they're constantly racing against the clock and are lucky just to get 8hrs of sleep.
Speaking to realism, it should also be pointed out that level 1-15 can happen in about 30 days, if you are hitting the budget every day.

I hear people saying that their players would get mad if they were "stuck" on a level. My question to you:
How do your players know, and why are they stuck?
I know when my party is going to level. I track their experience and track my XP budgets, I know when they'll "ding."
Because I know that, I usually set the arc so that they are logically taking the rest required to level up, when they are due to level up.
I also don't give them XP after every fight. In a dungeon or linked section of fights, I wait and give them their XP Gained at the end. I have it tracked and broken down per fight, but the act of stopping and saying,
"Okay, that wave of Hobgoblins was worth 120XP for each of you"
and then they erase and write it in, and then I tell them the next wave and they add it and erase and write it in and check the phb for how much they need before next level and start talking about what they get at level up and...
No. I just tell them whenever they've finished the event. End of the battle, end of the dungeon - whenever they could take a rest, is usually when I tell them what they've earned.
Because of that, they're never "stuck" at a level for very long. It's like,
"You guys just earned 350xp each, that should be enough to level you. What do you do now?"
"Well, we should head back to town and cash it in."
and like I said earlier, I plan for levels so that there's nothing really stopping them.

[Coffee_Dragon]

I've done pings at story-appropriate times, coinciding more often with ends of sessions than with long rests. If the PCs have traversed the 94 lairs of the snugglebunnies to find the dragon sphinx, they're going to ping once they're done talking to the dragon sphinx at the bottom, whether or not a rest follows.

Sometimes it would be nice to be able to tie ability or spell acquisition to something in the narrative, but you can often handwave those things, and depending on the campaign premise you may not have a choice. To always require training/downtime to level up feels like making virtue of necessity, assigning additional weight to the abstraction.

[Sir cryosin]

This kind of "gradual training that suddenly pays off" just doesn't sit right for me. Being better/tougher or knowing a spell you didn't previously after a week of downtime; yeah, that makes a certain kind of sense, but "ping!" levelling in the middle of a dungeon? Nah. Too much of an abstraction. For me, at least. Milage varies, of course.

That's because your thinking mechanically. Fighters, rangers, paladins, barbarians, any martial characters sharpen and hone there skills just buy fighting. They don't need to go off to a mountain with a waterfall in train for a weeks. Warlocks, clerics, druids, Sorcerers are just given or naturally discover power. Only one's that are the odd man out are wizard and bards but if you think about that they spent time during there rest's to work on spell formula,nincantation, lyrics, composing music. It makes more sense then ohh puff I know fireball.

[Easy_Lee]

The least realistic aspect of leveling is hit points. Everything else makes sense, even if it's limiting. But the book doesn't do a good job showing what leveling up would look like for a given class.

Barbarian: after a long rest, wake up to realize they've made big gains
Bard / Wizard: spark of inspiration, think of something that didn't occur to them before
Monk / Sorcerer: epiphany from self-reflection, able to tap innate powers previously inaccessible
Cleric / Paladin: epiphany in regards to their deity / vow, increasing their understanding and resolve
Rogue: ah-ha moment, sudden realization of a better way to get the job done

And so on. These things could happen at any time, anywhere. For the game to function, everyone has to do this on the road during the quest. That's why it happens in a dungeon, rather than more realistic places for the class (such as a tower for a wizard or a monastery for a monk).

But the hit point gains are foolish. Not only does it make low-CR monsters laughable and nonthreatening (except in high numbers, which arguably isn't even the same monster anymore), it also makes most other humanoids nonthreatening. A wizard able to cast 9th level magic and a monk able to dodge 9th level magic ought both still be susceptible to betrayal from underlings.

[Coffee_Dragon]

The least realistic aspect of leveling is hit points. Everything else makes sense, even if it's limiting.

It's the other way around for me. Hit points as a measure of survivability are already such a meta-phenomenon - not just a game abstraction in the crunch, but a genre convention in the fluff - that any quantitative changes don't need the slightest concrete justification.

[Hrugner]

For the most part I don't think it needs a rationale. Your wizard put the finishing touches on their new spells last night, your barbarian pushes himself further past his breaking point, your sorcerer worked out a trick that lets him focus his power in new ways, your warlock's patron floods him with new energy to supplement his growing potential, and so on and so forth. In 3.5/p it's a bit weirder as the ability growth is much less linear, but in 5e you are mostly getting better at the things you already do. Multiclassing can be tricky, and I think requiring some training for that isn't out of the ordinary.

[johnbragg]

Something you could do is have players declare what their next level is going to be. And then you can say that they're working on it in downtime. Especially if your campaigns have downtime, and people and things to interact with to get training from.

[Easy_Lee]

It's the other way around for me. Hit points as a measure of survivability are already such a meta-phenomenon - not just a game abstraction in the crunch, but a genre convention in the fluff - that any quantitative changes don't need the slightest concrete justification.

If hit points increased with levels, but nothing else did, the result would be the game getting less dangerous as one gained levels. That's the opposite of game designers' goals. It destroys flow.

[Beelzebubba]

Hi all,

How can I make leveling a bit more realistic in-game?

AD&D had explicit 'training' as a core rule. You didn't level until you left the dungeon and spent time outside and paid fees to trainers or sages or Thieve's Guild members or whatever. The time was in the order of a few weeks. The fees went up every level.

You continued to gain XP until you were 1 below what it took to gain a 2nd level, and then it stopped until you did the training. That tended to work in AD&D, because after level 7 or so, advancement become glacially slow.

[Steampunkette]

Objective XP. Problem solved.

Players gain levels at certain story based breakpoints, rather than XP from killing monsters. Since there's a natural story break, there's no mid dungeon ping.

Not that there's anything wrong with that, either. Sure it means the wizard unlocks a new spell level, possibly midcombat, but... so? Breaking put a stronger, higher level spell doesn't mean anything on it's own from a story standpoint. Maybe he'd been working on it for months and cast it out of desperation rather than mastery? Or he'd been hiding his ability to try and surprise the big bad. Or the monk who can now shadowstep all of a sudden got that much taunted moment of clarity during a battle. Happens all the time in martial arts myths.

Leveling up can be realistic or unrealistic depending only on how you handle it within the confines of the narrative.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Handwave it.

The way I look at it, characters are constantly learning and growing from their adventuring experiences. (That's why they're called experience points and not, I dunno, execution points or something.) These lessons and growth are gained constantly, but broken up into discrete levels because changing your stats after every encounter would get tedious fast.

[imaginary]

Thanks all for your insights and ideas. I settled on giving roleplaying bonus (xp or otherwise) for those who voluntarily helped come up with ingame rationale and role-playing for new spells and abilities. This still allows players who don't care to hand-wave it, and it gives others more agency. Thanks again.

[Coffee_Dragon]

Is it not possible that any who choose not to represent it in-game are not unhelpful or uncaring but actually making a legitimate choice as offered?

[imaginary]

Is it not possible that any who choose not to represent it in-game are not unhelpful or uncaring but actually making a legitimate choice as offered?

Sure it is a legitimate choice.

But as the DM it is not the type of game I'm hoping to run. Thus, as it true in most of life, I thought I'd chose to reward the style of play I'm most interested in promoting. In my hope, to the benefit of all.

[MarkVIIIMarc]

Two sessions ago we were supposed to show up leveled up except for our hit points. Half the crew did not and someone was late so we just played sorta half leveled up. In a way it was maddening, but in a way kinda cool.

The previous session to that, in character I tried to bring up I was working on a silence spell and if anyone had counterspell coming along. The in character silence spell strstegy talk about me casting it and the 16 strength druid grappling this socerer we've been hunting went over amazingly quickly like they thought I was cheating.

Oh well, seemed right to me, and in retrospect, kinda like the neatest leveling we've done.

[Easy_Lee]

Sure it is a legitimate choice.

But as the DM it is not the type of game I'm hoping to run. Thus, as it true in most of life, I thought I'd chose to reward the style of play I'm most interested in promoting. In my hope, to the benefit of all.

Nothing wrong with that. As a GM, you have to prioritize your own fun first. If you aren't happy, none of the players will be, and the campaign won't last long.

But please make sure your players know what general thing you're looking for them to do. And make sure it's general, not specific. There's little worse than a DM who knows exactly what he wants the players to do but won't tell them, and won't accept any substitutes either.

In short, present your players with the challenge of justifying their level ups, but make no assumptions about how they'll do it.

[Theodoxus]

Objective XP. Problem solved.

Players gain levels at certain story based breakpoints, rather than XP from killing monsters. Since there's a natural story break, there's no mid dungeon ping.

Not that there's anything wrong with that, either. Sure it means the wizard unlocks a new spell level, possibly midcombat, but... so? Breaking put a stronger, higher level spell doesn't mean anything on it's own from a story standpoint. Maybe he'd been working on it for months and cast it out of desperation rather than mastery? Or he'd been hiding his ability to try and surprise the big bad. Or the monk who can now shadowstep all of a sudden got that much taunted moment of clarity during a battle. Happens all the time in martial arts myths.

Leveling up can be realistic or unrealistic depending only on how you handle it within the confines of the narrative.

This is why I use Milestones. I've been using the 'Ping!' format, for ease, but have been contemplating in addition to Milestones, to require a bit of downtime. Allow the Wizard to research their new spells, the Cleric to get in touch with his parishioners, the Druid to meld into the forest, etc. It would also correspond with other downtime activities, such as item creation or being a landlord...

[KorvinStarmast]

How can I make leveling a bit more realistic in-game? Dig out the AD&D 1e PBH and DMG and use their method. That's "realistic" in that the XP value means you are ready to level up, but you have to do some training/updates, to get your full powers. (Sort of like CE in the software world, being able to work the latest version of a new programming language; )

When a wizard levels, suddenly they know more spells. When or how did they learn them? The way our DM does it, we have to be in a place with people/books, and time to mess around with previously learned lore, then the Wizard can write stuff into the books.

When a monk levels, suddenly they know or learn some new technique. They were taught the basics of it in the Monastery. Through fighting and adventuring they've (learning by doing) begun to learn how to apply this effectively, or had an "aha" moment.

For classes with abilities granted by supernatural beings or power, sure, additional ‘gifts’ make sense.
Clerics: what's not to like? Druids. What's not to like? Be right with (selected deity) and your life's easier.

But what about for the rest, how can you provide in-game, role-playing oriented rationale or explanations for leveling without requiring a lot of training? How do you explain new powers, feats, abilities?
If you want to get that granular, see my recommendation on AD&D 1e. And then remember that XP is an abstraction, and that you may find your players not embracing this unless you heavily invest in role playing and make a journey/episode out of it. 5e: down time activity. Stuff to do between adventures.


Do you just say the fighter has been practicing some technique for a long time, and suddenly figures it out? Do wizards suddenly have epiphanies? Thoughts?
All this and more. How crunchy and granular do you want to get?

[Gryndle]

Ever studied the acquisition of skills in the real universe? I've both studied and experienced that learning. Whether it's chess, programming, football or acrobatics people do make step changes in competence. Often you get to the end of a session thinking you're performing worse than before, then next time the situation comes up you find yourself performing at a whole new level.

The abstraction is closer to reality for me than is commonly considered. YMMV.

Edited for grammar.

this is the way studying martial arts was for me. I started jujitsu (the Japanese kind, and I loathe that I have to specify that) at age 10, and I pretty much sucked until at some point when I was 15, all of a sudden I didn't suck anymore, I went on to become the first non-Japanese to hold dan ranks in that particular family's style. Years later when that school closed, I began studying mizoun luohan kung fu, same thing, first few years I was just awful at some of their basics, and then all of a sudden I wasn't awful anymore. By the time that school closed and I went on to study other arts I just accepted that when learning something new and challenging you pretty much sucked until you just didn't.

Maybe this is why the leveling system doesn't bother me. I assume that professional adventurers are working their tails off in study or training in order to become what they are when they aren't actively involved in saving the town/kingdom/world. Except for warlocks...lazy a// jerks just bartering their souls for power.

[Theodoxus]

Dig out the AD&D 1e PBH and DMG and use their method. That's "realistic" in that the XP value means you are ready to level up, but you have to do some training/updates, to get your full powers.

If you want to get that granular, see my recommendation on AD&D 1e. And then remember that XP is an abstraction, and that you may find your players not embracing this unless you heavily invest in role playing and make a journey/episode out of it. 5e: down time activity. Stuff to do between adventures.

All this and more. How crunchy and granular do you want to get?

1st Ed also had different XP requirements for different classes. Rogues and fighters took less XP to level than Clerics or Wizards... I could see going back to that sort of system, especially if there was a consensus (or majority at least) on which subclasses are worst. If Beastmaster (classic) took 2/3 the XP to level as say, a Divination wizard, there'd probably be more people playing it, just for the leveling perk.

I don't think every class should have it's own XP table, but there's different ways of doing it... perhaps they're all the same, but you can 'burn off' or 'buy with' XP the features you'd like. So, a wizard could spend say, 100 XP per spell level to learn a new spell, with a max of 2 spells per new level purchased. If the wizard doesn't want to level slower, or has access to scrolls or books to copy from, then they'd not burn the XP to learn new spells. But one who doesn't have access to such things, or wants to learn a more esoteric spell that he just can't find a copy of, then he could "buy it" with XP.

If I were to implement that, I'd probably do it for every class. The Barbarian needs to purchase additional rages; the Rogue additional sneak dice... I'm spitballing, so don't have an idea for everyone, but I'd make sure it was fairish across the board.


this is the way studying martial arts was for me. I started jujitsu (the Japanese kind, and I loathe that I have to specify that) at age 10, and I pretty much sucked until at some point when I was 15, all of a sudden I didn't suck anymore, I went on to become the first non-Japanese to hold dan ranks in that particular family's style. Years later when that school closed, I began studying mizoun luohan kung fu, same thing, first few years I was just awful at some of their basics, and then all of a sudden I wasn't awful anymore. By the time that school closed and I went on to study other arts I just accepted that when learning something new and challenging you pretty much sucked until you just didn't.

Maybe this is why the leveling system doesn't bother me. I assume that professional adventurers are working their tails off in study or training in order to become what they are when they aren't actively involved in saving the town/kingdom/world. Except for warlocks...lazy a// jerks just bartering their souls for power.

My only issue with this overall idea is that, much like in CRPGs, the characters might advance from 1 to 15th level in a matter of weeks, if not days, depending on the DM/Quests/World etc. There's very likely not a lot of time to work their tails off in study or training... at least not to the degree necessary to represent the vast improvement between 1st and 15th level.

Granted, that's a playstyle decision more than reality though...

[Gryndle]

1st Ed also had different XP requirements for different classes. Rogues and fighters took less XP to level than Clerics or Wizards... I could see going back to that sort of system, especially if there was a consensus (or majority at least) on which subclasses are worst. If Beastmaster (classic) took 2/3 the XP to level as say, a Divination wizard, there'd probably be more people playing it, just for the leveling perk.

I don't think every class should have it's own XP table, but there's different ways of doing it... perhaps they're all the same, but you can 'burn off' or 'buy with' XP the features you'd like. So, a wizard could spend say, 100 XP per spell level to learn a new spell, with a max of 2 spells per new level purchased. If the wizard doesn't want to level slower, or has access to scrolls or books to copy from, then they'd not burn the XP to learn new spells. But one who doesn't have access to such things, or wants to learn a more esoteric spell that he just can't find a copy of, then he could "buy it" with XP.

If I were to implement that, I'd probably do it for every class. The Barbarian needs to purchase additional rages; the Rogue additional sneak dice... I'm spitballing, so don't have an idea for everyone, but I'd make sure it was fairish across the board.



My only issue with this overall idea is that, much like in CRPGs, the characters might advance from 1 to 15th level in a matter of weeks, if not days, depending on the DM/Quests/World etc. There's very likely not a lot of time to work their tails off in study or training... at least not to the degree necessary to represent the vast improvement between 1st and 15th level.

Granted, that's a playstyle decision more than reality though...

I wanna know what kind of table top D&D game you are playing where the PCs can go from levels 1-15 "in a matter of weeks, if not days". Those PCs are not mere mortals; maybe some sort of pseudo-Grecian demi-gods that gain power with each challenge conquered.