Been running 5e D&D both online & tabletop for just over three years now. A few thoughts. Feedback/abuse welcome.

The monster creation rules are garbage, I just have to do it 3e style and eyeball a CR.

The encounter-building rules are also garbage, I do it 1e style and ignore them, which works great in 5e.

The rapid advancement from 1st to 3rd is one of those 5e things that works much better in practice than on paper, and has significant potential gameplay benefits when combined with 'bounded accuracy'. Unlike 3e-4e or even really 1e-2e, I can start new players & new PCs of current players out at 1st level alongside 5th level veteran characters. They can contribute to the group, and if they survive they can catch up fast, hitting 3rd in a couple sessions. And there is something very special about starting D&D at 1st level. Partly the new PC is easy to understand, partly there is kind of a freshness to them, their whole life ahead of them, combined with a feeling of vulnerability.

XP - Been playing around with this a lot. The 5e XP system is over-focused on monsters I think, and tends to make wandering monsters a source of welcome XP rather than a threat. I was giving 1/5 monster XP but been finding that too little, and tending to over-award "quest" XP to compensate. Currently going with 0.5 standard monster XP, plus XP for gold looted from the dungeon & returned home. Did that last session & seemed to work; the party didn't do great on finding treasure so total was about 3/4 what they'd have got from standard full monster XP. 11th+ PCs will get only 1/10 treasure XP though, since 11-20 treasure awards are much bigger while XP per level almost flatlines.

Advancement Rate:
Overall for my sandbox Wilderlands I generally want an advancement rate of around 3-5 sessions/level, from 1-3 sessions at 1st-4th going to maybe 5-8 sessions at levels 5-10 and much slower, around 10 sessions/level, at 11-20. This is generally what I'm seeing in play with the XP chart as written, though with occasional spikes - 2nd level PCs carry off the orc hoard, or high level PC solos the dragon/lich/BBEG. That's great, advancement spikes are a good thing in my book.

Yeah, pretty much.   Going to straight XP for killing monsters was just a bad idea.  But then, what do I know, I love the Rolemaster experience system that everyone thinks is too much work.

What about using some of the milestones from Phandelver as inspiration for xp?

Quote from: RunningLaser;1026820What about using some of the milestones from Phandelver as inspiration for xp?

Can you talk more about this?

I, too, think XP for killing monsters is a horrible idea. It turns every session into looking for a slugfest instead of looking to solve problems in creative ways. (IMO) But if the module has something unique in its structure for milestones I'd really love that.

I have yet to read 5e, but I would have thought, from everything I've heard about a retrenching back to basics, it would have gone with XP for Gold -- which might be goofy but mechanically does a ton of things to supports awesome game play.

The two things that bum me out about 5E are the high ratio of typical HP to typical damage, which draws out combat by a factor of a couple relative to OSR versions of the game, and the great complexity of class powers after you accumulate a few levels. As a seasoned 5E player, what do you make of these things?

Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;1026841I have yet to read 5e, but I would have thought, from everything I've heard about a retrenching back to basics, it would have gone with XP for Gold -- which might be goofy but mechanically does a ton of things to supports awesome game play.

Like I said, I use XP for gold in my 5e tabletop games, it works great. For online play I go with a fairly freeform quest/session award based on what's been achieved.

Quote from: Larsdangly;1026843The two things that bum me out about 5E are the high ratio of typical HP to typical damage, which draws out combat by a factor of a couple relative to OSR versions of the game, and the great complexity of class powers after you accumulate a few levels. As a seasoned 5E player, what do you make of these things?

I find PCs do plenty of damage generally to eat through enemy hp. High HP is only ever an issue if there are very large numbers of high hp foes, eg 24 vrocks & 20 veterans were a couple I remember. Anything vaguely resembling 5e encounter parameters is fine.

Complexity of class powers - generally fine IME, for most players. I've even taken to building a few PC-class NPCs, although it's usually better to make NPCs as monsters. Slow pace of advancement is important for players to get used to their powers, though.

Quote from: Larsdangly;1026843The two things that bum me out about 5E are the high ratio of typical HP to typical damage, which draws out combat by a factor of a couple relative to OSR versions of the game, and the great complexity of class powers after you accumulate a few levels. As a seasoned 5E player, what do you make of these things?

HP is a tough one in 5e. I feel that about every class except for the Fighter and Paladin should probably have their HD dropped one die level. So wizards are using a d4, Rogues a d6, and so on, and roll for starting HP or use the suggested average. Though it works as it stands as alot of monsters deal out alot of damage. Characters drop fairly easy, especially at the early levels.

A second solution would be to stop HP advancement at level 10 and thereafter use just the CON bonus. Your typical 5e 10th level Rogue would then average around 45 hp before CON mod and would max at level 20 between 45 and 145 depending on how much they pumped CON. But the characters are then alot more vulnerable to some of the high damage output monsters. And they are deadly even using normal HP.

I've found that most combats no matter the level tend to be over in around 5 rounds. A few have gone to 10. But overall its not been too long really. A battle lasts anywhere from 10-20 minutes and overall the class abilities dont impact that as much. Its not that hard to have this stuff noted down for quick reference. The rest is frontloaded.

Agree with the OP.  

Instead of XP for milestones, I've used something from the 2E era (though I have no idea if it was standard or some Dragon article or from some other source), where "quest" XP is based on the difficulty of the quest, and calculated based on a 20th of the XP needed to hit that level.  So a 5th level standard quest would be worth 6500 / 20 = 325.  Then a minor version is half that, and a major one is double or triple (though more likely, split into multiple parts, only some of which may be gained).  The quest XP applies to each character.  Worked fine up through the first 4 levels, and then I decided for ease of use and remembering, I'd rather make it a base of 30 points per level, then award them more freely (that is, about double my previous rate).  That works out to gradually slowing advancement past 3rd.  When the characters are really daring, they get about 2/3 of their XP from monsters.  When they are more cautious, it's about 1/2.  I'm fine with either outcome.  We get some of both in play.

On the increased hit points, I wonder if the main problem is that many of the monster manual creatures are a little weak on damage?  I haven't done an exact comparison, but I have been using a lot of Tome of Beast monsters lately, which seem to be more of a threat, CR for CR.  So yeah, either dropping hit points a little or upping monster damage will work to keep things moving.  Also matters how much you play the monsters as creatures of the world with natural reactions versus playing as a game with the monsters trying to focus fire and take out PCs.  I think the game might have been designed for somewhere in the middle of those extremes.  I tend to go for more natural reactions, which means I need more or nastier monsters to pose a real threat.

Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;1026841Can you talk more about this?

I, too, think XP for killing monsters is a horrible idea. It turns every session into looking for a slugfest instead of looking to solve problems in creative ways. (IMO) But if the module has something unique in its structure for milestones I'd really love that.

I have yet to read 5e, but I would have thought, from everything I've heard about a retrenching back to basics, it would have gone with XP for Gold -- which might be goofy but mechanically does a ton of things to supports awesome game play.

In the Lost Mines of Phandelver, you get XP not just for defeating monsters, but also finding new areas or completing a quest. So, if you find the entrance to the cave, 100 xp.  Stuff like that.

Quote from: RunningLaser;1026877In the Lost Mines of Phandelver, you get XP not just for defeating monsters, but also finding new areas or completing a quest. So, if you find the entrance to the cave, 100 xp.  Stuff like that.

Thanks!

A couple of more questions:

• In terms of XP rewards, how much of the proportion generally comes from monsters compared to the milestones? (PCs get XP for defeating monsters in OD&D and BX, after all... but compared to gold it is a small amount).
• Do the Players know what the milestones are ahead of time? Do they know the value of the milestones ahead of time? Or do they simply get XP when they stumble over a milestone?

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1026870Agree with the OP.  

Instead of XP for milestones, I've used something from the 2E era (though I have no idea if it was standard or some Dragon article or from some other source), where "quest" XP is based on the difficulty of the quest, and calculated based on a 20th of the XP needed to hit that level.  So a 5th level standard quest would be worth 6500 / 20 = 325.  Then a minor version is half that, and a major one is double or triple (though more likely, split into multiple parts, only some of which may be gained).  The quest XP applies to each character.  Worked fine up through the first 4 levels, and then I decided for ease of use and remembering, I'd rather make it a base of 30 points per level, then award them more freely (that is, about double my previous rate).  That works out to gradually slowing advancement past 3rd.  When the characters are really daring, they get about 2/3 of their XP from monsters.  When they are more cautious, it's about 1/2.  I'm fine with either outcome.  We get some of both in play.

On the increased hit points, I wonder if the main problem is that many of the monster manual creatures are a little weak on damage?  I haven't done an exact comparison, but I have been using a lot of Tome of Beast monsters lately, which seem to be more of a threat, CR for CR.  So yeah, either dropping hit points a little or upping monster damage will work to keep things moving.  Also matters how much you play the monsters as creatures of the world with natural reactions versus playing as a game with the monsters trying to focus fire and take out PCs.  I think the game might have been designed for somewhere in the middle of those extremes.  I tend to go for more natural reactions, which means I need more or nastier monsters to pose a real threat.

I use that 1/20 of a level quest XP idea, it's in BECMI/RC I think as well as 2e. 3e has it as 1/13, and 4e has it as 1/10 of a level. For 5e though I went over to quest XP = 100 per level, so level 1 100, level 5 500, level 12 1200 to level 20 2000. Works well and gradually slows advancement at high level.

I agree some 5e MM monsters lack damage, I tend to simply give more attacks where it feels lacking, often increasing CR+1 in return.

Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;1026891In terms of XP rewards, how much of the proportion generally comes from monsters compared to the milestones? (PCs get XP for defeating monsters in OD&D and BX, after all... but compared to gold it is a small amount).

It depends on how you set it up. The DMG gives guidelines for awarding milestones however leaves the exact mix to you.

Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;1026891Do the Players know what the milestones are ahead of time? Do they know the value of the milestones ahead of time? Or do they simply get XP when they stumble over a milestone?

No, but in practice it obvious when a milestone award going to occur. We are not talking about collecting gold bennies here, but awards for accomplishing goals whether it some personal goal, exploration, defeating the big bad.

Quote from: S'mon;1026893I use that 1/20 of a level quest XP idea, it's in BECMI/RC I think as well as 2e. 3e has it as 1/13, and 4e has it as 1/10 of a level. For 5e though I went over to quest XP = 100 per level, so level 1 100, level 5 500, level 12 1200 to level 20 2000. Works well and gradually slows advancement at high level.

I agree some 5e MM monsters lack damage, I tend to simply give more attacks where it feels lacking, often increasing CR+1 in return.

Long ago in the early 80s, I ditched money and magic item xp for when I use D&D rules. I still still tally the monster XP but the lion share of the player's XP comes from milestone xp. In it's place I created a roleplaying award.

This document was typed out around 1984.

When I started running OD&D campaigns in 2007  I changed from a roleplaying award to a milestone award. Although I didn't call it that back then.  My formula was a base xp award times their level times a factor. The base XP changed to being from 100 xp to 400 xp depending on how fast everybody wanted to level. That only time I go higher than 100 xp as the base is for when I run campaigns with time constraints like once or twice a month at a game store, or once a week two hours in the late evening. The factor is based on the significance of the goal. One for when it is a ordinary evening with some progress, up to four for achieving something major. In my old system 3 was the typical factor but I found "punishing" player with a 1 or 2 rarely worked as intended. So I just increased the base award and dropped the default factor to 1. Now I only reward.

What I reward is achieving personal and party goals. I studiously avoid trying to state what anybody ought to be doing. Instead I listen to what their plans are and craft the milestones based on that. This way if for some reason the party wanted to go chicken farming, I got it covered. Note I don't consider character level to be a mark of specialness only a indicator of general experience. Similar to saying one D&D level = 25 GURPS points.

D&D 5e take on it relies on Challenge Levels, in theory higher level characters take on more difficult challenges and get a higher milestone. I didn't care for that so I used the above for the two D&D 5e campaigns I ran. Adventure in Middle Earth has their own milestone version with different details but operates on the same idea so I use theirs for my AiME campaign.