Rate of milestone leveling

[AureusFulgens]

So the campaign I'm running right now is using milestone leveling for several reasons,among them scheduling issues - we're all college students and I'm expecting attendance to be variable, so XP counting would be a pain.

I've gotten them to level 3 at the end of the second session, which seemed like a reasonable pace - first and second are kind of "apprentice" levels, and they seemed comfortable with their abilities. I'm a little uncertain about how quickly to let them level from here, though. The DMG suggests every other session. Is that reasonable?

I ask partly to let myself plan ahead. This should be about a 15-session campaign, and I'd like to know what power level to be going for as I design my final monsters.

[rbstr]

I guess it really depends on how strong you want the party to get.

I tend to feel like gaining at least *something* per session is a good pace. That could be a level, some cool loot or a particularly big story pay off.

[Tiadoppler]

What level do you want the campaign to end at? For that length of campaign, 7-12 seems like the range to aim for. 12 would be very fast leveling over 15 sessions, while 7 would be very slow, especially if the party's already at 3.


The questions for you:

Do you want people's characters to stay pretty consistent, or dramatically increase in power?

What scale does the party operate at? Local adventurers, in and around one city? National heroes who affect an entire region? Planar paragons who safeguard reality from the unknowable beyond? In my opinion, a level >14 shouldn't be doing missions for the mayor of Microville, and a level <7 shouldn't be regarded as heroes of legend by dragons, demigods and creatures from the great beyond.

[AureusFulgens]

I guess it really depends on how strong you want the party to get.

I tend to feel like gaining at least *something* per session is a good pace. That could be a level, some cool loot or a particularly big story pay off.

Interesting. I kind of want to see them get to 8th or 9th level, which squares with the every-other-session rate. Thing is, these are new players, and while I'm fine with speeding up to level 3 and they seem to be taking it well, I don't want to level them up faster than they can get used to their new abilities. Which I guess is something I'll have to figure out as I go with them.

I like that as a rule of thumb. A level and a story payoff seem to go hand in hand, but I've also got some neat magic items I'd like to toss their way for the off sessions.

I guess a good follow-up question is, has anyone used this style of leveling, and what rates did you find worked out well?

[DivisibleByZero]

There is no right or wrong answer. Level them as fast or as slow as your campaign (or personal whims) dictates.

As I was saying in another thread, the way that we do it is that you spend X # of sessions at a given level, where X = your current level.
So for us, and the way that our games go, it would look like this:
Currently level 3, approximately 15 more sessions planned:
3 sessions at level 3 (3 sessions)
4 sessions at level 4 (7 sessions)
5 sessions at level 5 (12 sessions)
6 sessions at level 6, but there are only 3 sessions left. So we'd end the "season" at level 6, halfway to level 7.

Every group works at their own pace. That's the pace that we use.

[AureusFulgens]

What level do you want the campaign to end at? For that length of campaign, 7-12 seems like the range to aim for. 12 would be very fast leveling over 15 sessions, while 7 would be very slow, especially if the party's already at 3.


The questions for you:

Do you want people's characters to stay pretty consistent, or dramatically increase in power?

What scale does the party operate at? Local adventurers, in and around one city? National heroes who affect an entire region? Planar paragons who safeguard reality from the unknowable beyond? In my opinion, a level >14 shouldn't be doing missions for the mayor of Microville, and a level <7 shouldn't be regarded as heroes of legend by dragons, demigods and creatures from the great beyond.

I think I've had them at level 9 for the final battle in my head, and I was uncertain if that would be too fast to level them given that they were new players.

They're functioning as heroes for their local region at the moment, though I see them fighting a national/continental threat by the end. (the villain is a living desert trying to escape its prison, and they'll be contending with its high priest, a powerful evil druid) People won't have heard of them in general, since the organization they work for is secret, so that might not be the best litmus test.

[white lancer]

I'm doing milestone leveling in the campaign I'm running, and I don't think I would want to tie it to a number of sessions TBH. Sometimes sessions go by without the party really accomplishing much of anything (whether it's because of planning or roleplaying or shopping or some combination), so it would feel weird for them to jump a level after something like that. So I've been tying it more to them reaching what I deem milestones in the campaign, which would involve completion of a few smaller "quests" or one big one. If the party has accomplished enough or experienced enough to where I think leveling is appropriate, I give them the level.

However, I'm not sure the way I do it would be appropriate for a campaign that has a stricter stopping point. Mine's an open-ended campaign, so it doesn't matter if they level slowly sometimes, but if you want to aim for a certain level while not adding more sessions, I think you're probably fine to go by the two-sessions-per-level guideline. Leveling up might not always feel like an accomplishment to the players, based off of how each session goes, but that's probably okay based on the type of campaign you're running.

[DivisibleByZero]

I'm doing milestone leveling in the campaign I'm running, and I don't think I would want to tie it to a number of sessions TBH. Sometimes sessions go by without the party really accomplishing much of anything (whether it's because of planning or roleplaying or shopping or some combination), so it would feel weird for them to jump a level after something like that.

We consider that a feature.
Entire sessions can play out with nothing more than RP, and you're still one step closer to gaining a level.
It has completely removed the MurderHobo or "kill first, ask questions later" mindset, and has done amazing wonders for getting people interested in things other than combat.
Players actively seek out non-combat resolutions, because they aren't sacrificing any XP by doing so.

[willdaBEAST]

I've been doing milestone leveling for the CoS campaign I run and really enjoy the objective based leveling rather than getting it through xp.

What I'd recommend for your campaign is to come up with some overall objectives and tie some or all of them to leveling up. You mentioned a local conflict expanding in scope and some magic items you want to give the party. You can tie leveling up to things like: the party deals with the local threat, the party makes an important ally for the next stage of the conflict, they hear about magical artifact X and recover it, etc. Things like that help the party maintain focus on their immediate and long term goals.

Personally I found my players really hungry to level up early on, as they neared lvl 10 it was more of an unexpected treat than something they were eager for. Going from 1-9 in 15 sessions seems a bit fast imo, unless your sessions run long. I think you'll start to see any casters start to get overwhelmed, unless they're spending a lot of time researching what spells they have available. I'd make yourself available as a resource out of game for any player that has ability or spell questions.

I think your concern about leveling up too quickly for new players is something you should keep in mind. What I tried to do was build encounters that encouraged use of new abilities or spells. A lot of players tend to find something that works and use it every time, give your players reason to experiment.

[white lancer]

We consider that a feature.
Entire sessions can play out with nothing more than RP, and you're still one step closer to gaining a level.
It has completely removed the MurderHobo or "kill first, ask questions later" mindset, and has done amazing wonders for getting people interested in things other than combat.
Players actively seek out non-combat resolutions, because they aren't sacrificing any XP by doing so.

Sure, that makes sense. I prefer to reward the players for accomplishments, so while I wouldn't want to penalize them for roleplaying (I hand out inspiration for that), actually advancing the "plot" is worth more towards leveling. I've found that objective-based leveling hasn't discouraged non-combat resolutions thus far, because non-combat resolutions still meet the objective...and there are points in which jumping straight to combat actually hinders them.

[Tiadoppler]

I think I've had them at level 9 for the final battle in my head, and I was uncertain if that would be too fast to level them given that they were new players.

They're functioning as heroes for their local region at the moment, though I see them fighting a national/continental threat by the end.


From a narrative/power level perspective, my opinion would be that 9th level is a little low to solve a continental-level threat unless they're directly backed up by the armies of the nations they're helping or playing a linchpin type role in which they handle one specific task while the big armies/powers fight in the background (throwing a ring at a volcano, for example).

From a new player/learning level, I think 8-9th level is pretty perfect for 4ish months of D&D experience.

[Tanarii]

I ask partly to let myself plan ahead. This should be about a 15-session campaign, and I'd like to know what power level to be going for as I design my final monsters.


From a new player/learning level, I think 8-9th level is pretty perfect for 4ish months of D&D experience.Using XP, and going at the (apparently fast) rate of 1 adventuring day per 3-4 hr session, you'd be looking at something like 15 sessions to reach level 9. So 4 months of weekly sessions sounds about right for level 9, if you play once a week and cover an adventuring days worth of challenges per session.

(After typing this in response to Toadoppler, I went back and saw OP had said 15 sessions and was like, woah man. So including that quote too. :smallbiggrin: )

[AureusFulgens]

My party is largely a plot-loving party, so the fact that a lot of you seem to find milestone leveling to encourage RP-heavy sessions is encouraging. (I do have one guy who's more of a mechanics/combat guy, so there will be fights, but that's the general character of the party.)


I've been doing milestone leveling for the CoS campaign I run and really enjoy the objective based leveling rather than getting it through xp.

What I'd recommend for your campaign is to come up with some overall objectives and tie some or all of them to leveling up. You mentioned a local conflict expanding in scope and some magic items you want to give the party. You can tie leveling up to things like: the party deals with the local threat, the party makes an important ally for the next stage of the conflict, they hear about magical artifact X and recover it, etc. Things like that help the party maintain focus on their immediate and long term goals.

Personally I found my players really hungry to level up early on, as they neared lvl 10 it was more of an unexpected treat than something they were eager for. Going from 1-9 in 15 sessions seems a bit fast imo, unless your sessions run long. I think you'll start to see any casters start to get overwhelmed, unless they're spending a lot of time researching what spells they have available. I'd make yourself available as a resource out of game for any player that has ability or spell questions.

I think your concern about leveling up too quickly for new players is something you should keep in mind. What I tried to do was build encounters that encouraged use of new abilities or spells. A lot of players tend to find something that works and use it every time, give your players reason to experiment.

This is probably what I'm most concerned about. I'd like to give my casters a little more time to get comfortable with what they can do - I have two sorcerers and a druid, plus a paladin for good measure. I guess I'll have to improvise a bit - see how things go. I like the idea about encounters that force them to experiment, though, and I've been trying to make each encounter a little different, so I'm thinking along those lines already.

I live on the same campus as all of these people, and I see them a lot outside of our weekly sessions, so I should be available if they need help.

[willdaBEAST]

My party is largely a plot-loving party, so the fact that a lot of you seem to find milestone leveling to encourage RP-heavy sessions is encouraging. (I do have one guy who's more of a mechanics/combat guy, so there will be fights, but that's the general character of the party.)



This is probably what I'm most concerned about. I'd like to give my casters a little more time to get comfortable with what they can do - I have two sorcerers and a druid, plus a paladin for good measure. I guess I'll have to improvise a bit - see how things go. I like the idea about encounters that force them to experiment, though, and I've been trying to make each encounter a little different, so I'm thinking along those lines already.

I live on the same campus as all of these people, and I see them a lot outside of our weekly sessions, so I should be available if they need help.

I encourage patience with your casters. What can seem incredibly obvious to you, can be esoteric to the players. For example I set up a zombie encounter for my Druid to shine, he had just used spike growth in a prior battle and had he used it against the zombies, they would've shredded themselves on it and been slowed to a crawl. Instead the party looked for ways to escape the zombies and due to the mechanics of the encounter, a fallen tree blocking the road, broke one of their horse's legs trying to quickly forge a way through the dense underbrush.

What's helped my players is emphasizing the importance of targeting appropriate stats with spells and this is a collaborative effort. First you explain the mechanics of the DCs and then as a DM you try to be more descriptive about obvious creature features. If the creature has a high dex, describe them as agile, if they're immensely strong, describe the rippling muscles. Basically, clue your players in on what the creature's strengths might be (only if they're obvious), or if the caster uses a spell with a save that the creature will excel at, describe the creature as easily overcoming that challenge. Similarly you can explain when a spell attack makes more sense than an ability save (low AC) or vice versa.

I've also taken time to explain the importance of things like concentration (have a variety of spells that you can cast while concentrating), spell selection (both the obvious like if you have a single lvl 2 slot, don't choose only lvl 2 spells and the less obvious like getting some intel on monsters in the area so you can narrow down spell selection), also decide how you're going to treat rarer components. For my CoS campaign I made it clear that diamonds were a rare commodity, so spells like revivify and raise dead require a significant resource investment.

It's been surprising to me how counterintuitive a lot of spell casting is for most players. In an AL game I play in, we had an encounter vs 6 wights. One of my allies waited until all but one wight were defeated and then cast burning hands, despite the fact that they were funneled into a choke point. At the next session I asked if he wanted any feedback on that and then explained how those AOE spells excel when they hit multiple targets. To me that seems like something so obvious it doesn't warrant addressing, but it helps not to assume things like that and again, I encourage patience when bringing it up.

[BW022]

The DMG suggests every other session. Is that reasonable?

This depends upon you. However, the problem with leveling that quickly is that characters gain abilities without the chance to become familiar with them (or even use them) before becoming obsolete. For example, at 3rd-level someone gains levitate. However, they miss a session, spend several in a dungeon, and then finally get a chance to cast it when assaulting a tower -- only some other PC now has fly. Likewise, characters don't get a chance to fight together, develop tactics, learn each others abilities, etc.

I personally like at least four sessions per level -- although getting through 1st and 2nd in fewer is fine. Perhaps a good rule is as many sessions as the previous level. I.e. 1 adventure to gain 2nd-level, then 2 (more) to gain 3rd, 3 more for 4th, 4 more for 5th, etc. You'd reach say 6th level after 15 sessions. I'll also mention that milestone levelling assumes that players meet their goals and the campaign is extremely linear. You don't have much room if players deviate, don't get clues, fail in a fight, etc. Rapid leveling also means issues with magical items, treasure, etc. coming so quickly or else falling behind.

Alternately, if you are short in the number sessions... you might consider doing a split. Do the 1, 2, and 3 adventures to get them to say 4th fairly quickly. Treat this as a start or background. Then have players level to 7th or something and start the campaign years later. The PCs meet up after having separated and gained higher levels. Then run the campaign at a say 5 session per level, with them reaching 10th by the end. This gets them to a reasonable level, but gives them enough time from 7th to 10th that they aren't flying through levels.

[AureusFulgens]

I think I'm starting to agree that 2 sessions/level might be a little fast. The conclusion that's pushing me toward is that maybe I should think about seeing if the campaign can continue into the summer a little bit to get a few more sessions in, so that they can get to a reasonable level before I make them fight the high priest of a long-imprisoned evil god.

We've also hit some scheduling roadblocks for the next week or two, so that's going to make things even more interesting.


I encourage patience with your casters. What can seem incredibly obvious to you, can be esoteric to the players. For example I set up a zombie encounter for my Druid to shine, he had just used spike growth in a prior battle and had he used it against the zombies, they would've shredded themselves on it and been slowed to a crawl. Instead the party looked for ways to escape the zombies and due to the mechanics of the encounter, a fallen tree blocking the road, broke one of their horse's legs trying to quickly forge a way through the dense underbrush.

What's helped my players is emphasizing the importance of targeting appropriate stats with spells and this is a collaborative effort. First you explain the mechanics of the DCs and then as a DM you try to be more descriptive about obvious creature features. If the creature has a high dex, describe them as agile, if they're immensely strong, describe the rippling muscles. Basically, clue your players in on what the creature's strengths might be (only if they're obvious), or if the caster uses a spell with a save that the creature will excel at, describe the creature as easily overcoming that challenge. Similarly you can explain when a spell attack makes more sense than an ability save (low AC) or vice versa.

I've also taken time to explain the importance of things like concentration (have a variety of spells that you can cast while concentrating), spell selection (both the obvious like if you have a single lvl 2 slot, don't choose only lvl 2 spells and the less obvious like getting some intel on monsters in the area so you can narrow down spell selection), also decide how you're going to treat rarer components. For my CoS campaign I made it clear that diamonds were a rare commodity, so spells like revivify and raise dead require a significant resource investment.

It's been surprising to me how counterintuitive a lot of spell casting is for most players. In an AL game I play in, we had an encounter vs 6 wights. One of my allies waited until all but one wight were defeated and then cast burning hands, despite the fact that they were funneled into a choke point. At the next session I asked if he wanted any feedback on that and then explained how those AOE spells excel when they hit multiple targets. To me that seems like something so obvious it doesn't warrant addressing, but it helps not to assume things like that and again, I encourage patience when bringing it up.

This is some really helpful advice, thank you very much! I'm thinking I'd like to start working with them on things like this. Most of my players are new to D&D, but a lot of them are veteran players of other RPG's or have some familiarity with the game, so I'm optimistic about their response. It's also another fairly compelling argument in favor of slowing down the leveling pace.

[Tanarii]

I think I'm starting to agree that 2 sessions/level might be a little fast. D&D base leveling speed feels very fast to me too. But I've felt that way for the last few editions.

Note that 2 sessions / level assumes the equivalent in XP gain of one adventuring day per session, which seems to be quite a lot of content per session from comments I've seen others make. So it's potentially fast even in 5e terms.

Not to mention that from levels 4 through 11 it should be 2.4 adventuring days per level gained.

So if your players aren't facing 6 medium encounters or 3 deadly per session ... Slow it down. If they face that every 2 sessions, they should gain a level ever 5 sessions in the Tier 2 band.

(At least the designers knew what they were doing and slowed things down for Tier 2. That's definitely the sweet spot.)

[willdaBEAST]

This is some really helpful advice, thank you very much! I'm thinking I'd like to start working with them on things like this. Most of my players are new to D&D, but a lot of them are veteran players of other RPG's or have some familiarity with the game, so I'm optimistic about their response. It's also another fairly compelling argument in favor of slowing down the leveling pace.
Happy to help out, I hope you and your players have a great campaign!