Advice Running Multi-Level Games

[Catullus64]

So I finally have the opportunity to run in-person games for the first time in nearly two years, at my local game shop. The sort of game that I pitched to them is a West Marches-esque game, in which there is a consistent setting and home-base town, and players can play and level up a single character like in a campaign, but each session is a standalone adventure in which the players choose an adventure to pursue from several quest hooks on a map.

They want (and I generally agree) for new characters to start at 1st level, for the greatest ease of bringing on brand-new players. But a side effect of that is that, once the game has been running for awhile and has a core of returning players, the parties will have significant level gaps; I plan to let said characters go as high as Level 4, and the marginal differences in power between levels in Tier 1 are very significant.

I can envision there being some fun, with the right atmosphere, to having your 1st-level PC tag along on a 3rd or 4th-level adventure with higher-level companions. Less fun-sounding is going on a 1st-level adventure and having the one or two high-level guys hog all the glory. Clearly some difficulty scaling is necessary, but I also want the choice in adventure difficulty to be meaningful, so I can't just scale the adventures completely by level.

I would appreciate advice or anecdotes from anybody with experience running for parties where the characters have different levels, especially one where the player characters have a choice of multiple adventure paths to follow. (To clarify, I will be making all these adventures myself from scratch, not using modules.)

[Burley]

I played in a friend's West March game and brought a 1st level with a group of 5th and 6th level. A lot of the "work" falls on the low-level character's player to pick their battles, as it were. Easy for a caster or ranged character to hide and pop up when its safe to buff or potshot, much harder for a melee fighter to stay alive.

For a DM, think of the low-level as an NPC that you're not going to control. Give them plot armor, fudge a roll, whatever. Hopefully the stronger PCs will treat it as an escort mission and protect the weaker one, who will fill the level gap quickly. Remember to award XP, rather than work on milestones. A 1st level character reaches 2nd at 300xp and 3rd at 900. 4th level happens at 2,700xp, meaning PCs will sit on 3rd level for a bit while 1s and 2s catch up (which may happen in one session).

Also, if you're worried that combat encounters will be too much, try incorporating skill encounters (which is a 4e idea that didn't really come to 5e). A flooding room or hanging vines over a pit offer opportunities for different characters to use different skills, and the level/power gap isn't as noticeable with skills.

[Mjolnirbear]

Is West Marches play allergic to milestones?

Whatever floats your boat, but from my perspective you are giving yourself way more work and worry. Unless you see some gain to that (I see none, myself) I do t know why you wouldn't use milestones or just make everyone level at the same time regardless of attendance.

[loki_ragnarock]

From my experience, level differences don't mean quite as much as they might have in, say, 3rd edition.

A second level character can run around with a party of fourths without too much problem, just slightly squishier, but mostly fine. Such is the joy of bounded accuracy. You might see some wonkiness if there's like a whole tier of play between characters, but a handful of levels aren't that big a deal.

[Catullus64]

Is West Marches play allergic to milestones?

Whatever floats your boat, but from my perspective you are giving yourself way more work and worry. Unless you see some gain to that (I see none, myself) I do t know why you wouldn't use milestones or just make everyone level at the same time regardless of attendance.

I don't believe I said that I wasn't using milestones; did you get that from Burley's comment suggesting I stick to XP? As it is, I can see advantages to both XP or milestones. Milestone is a lot easier to manage for the DM, and works nicely with discrete sessions. XP is good because it gives players a more granular sense of progress in between levels. I don't think I want people's leveling up to be disconnected to playtime, though; firstly because I think it best for brand new players to start at 1st level, and I want that to be an option even later in the game cycle, but also because I want a sense that your character's level is an actual function of the adventures they go on and survive.

[Kurt Kurageous]

As it is, I can see advantages to both XP or milestones. Milestone is a lot easier to manage for the DM, and works nicely with discrete sessions. XP is good because it gives players a more granular sense of progress in between levels.

The very human game players at your table are always learning from you, the DM. Consider what you are teaching them with your rewards.

XP rewards positive actions, regardless of relation to story. So the sidequest is as good as the main quest because it leads to XP, and should be done when it is available.

Milestone rewards getting through a part of the story as quickly as possible. The sidequest (or anything but moving the story) is actually in the way of getting the reward. Yes, it's easy to manage, but at a big price if you have optional things that the party or individuals could do to make the story richer.

OT, but a related question is individual XP for the solo actions (rogue defeating lock/trap, sense-o-bot detecting something, face negotiations, etc.) or everyone gets the same XP at the end of the session.

If you do individual XP, you reward solo actions. If you do shared XP, it tends to dampen the solos, but not eliminate them as players want to have their characters shine. The other players tend to tolerate solos better because they share the XP earned.

I use party XP. It's easier to manage and keeps the party focused on the party and off comparisons and suspicions of favoritism. YMMV.

[Burley]

Is West Marches play allergic to milestones?

Whatever floats your boat, but from my perspective you are giving yourself way more work and worry. Unless you see some gain to that (I see none, myself) I do t know why you wouldn't use milestones or just make everyone level at the same time regardless of attendance.

XP works a lot better, because it gives lower level characters a chance to fill the gap. With Milestones, a two-level gap will always be a two-level gap.

Also, I disagree with Loki's assessment that level gaps aren't a big deal in 5e. On top of HP and spell slots, 5e's proficiency bonus scales with character level (rather than 3e's class level) and it affects attacks, spells and skills. If the gap straddles Ability Score Increase/Feat levels, its even more apparent that a lower level character is lower level, because monsters' defenses scale with proficiency bonus increases. Plus, 5e's challenge ratings assume a party with traditional roles (tank, damage, healer) and your party will feel the difference when your damage-guy is a whole spell slot behind.

[Keravath]

You might want to get feedback from folks who have run Adventurers League games. In AL, adventures are divided by tiers 1-4, 5-10, 11-16 and 17-20. Rarely you might see gaps larger than that when running a hardcover but not usually.

Grouping levels 1-4 together hasn't been much of an issue in my experience. The front line can be a bit dangerous for the low level characters but even a strength based fighter or paladin often has javelins to throw as a backup if the situation is too dangerous. Also, you can have the monsters mostly focus on the bigger threats in melee which are usually the higher level characters though this only works for intelligent enemies.

However, there is a significant power jump in characters around levels 5 (extra attack, 3rd level spells), 11 (improved attacks, 6th level spells), and 17 (9th level spells, etc). These jumps will make it more challenging for wide ranges of levels to participate together at the same time.

Depending on how many folks turn out, how regularly they play and the pool of players, you may find it best to start a second session for the higher level tier 2 characters either run at the same time by a second DM or at a different time of the week. It is still ok for a level 5 to play with a level 4 but the level 5 will likely be contributing a lot more in combat style encounters. Anyway, you don't really know how the situation will develop so start with tier 1 and see if you need to split into two sessions for higher and lower level characters later.

[Catullus64]

XP works a lot better, because it gives lower level characters a chance to fill the gap. With Milestones, a two-level gap will always be a two-level gap.

Also, I disagree with Loki's assessment that level gaps aren't a big deal in 5e. On top of HP and spell slots, 5e's proficiency bonus scales with character level (rather than 3e's class level) and it affects attacks, spells and skills. If the gap straddles Ability Score Increase/Feat levels, its even more apparent that a lower level character is lower level, because monsters' defenses scale with proficiency bonus increases. Plus, 5e's challenge ratings assume a party with traditional roles (tank, damage, healer) and your party will feel the difference when your damage-guy is a whole spell slot behind.

The first statement here need not necessarily be true; if I did milestones for this style of game, you would probably need to complete only one adventure to go up to 2nd level, but perhaps a further three before you can reach 3rd, and another four after that before reaching 4th.

I think that level gaps within tiers of play aren't as significant. Proficiency bonuses remain consistent from 1-4, and the really game-changing spells are generally synchronized by tier as well.