Quote from: happyhermit;1027150a lot of players just don't care about it and would rather just trust the GM to decide when they level.

If they don't care about levelling, I'm happy for them to stay at 1st.

For the kind of open table multi-GM transferable PCs type thing I'm running, XP is a vital mechanic. For a typical "1-15 quest for 5 PCs" type campaign levelling by milestones every few sessions is ok.

Mind you, I think every 2-3 sessions is too quick. Even when I ran my "Runelords of the Shattered Star" quest based campaign, PCs went from 1st to (highest) 18th level at generally about half that rate (using XP as written). Checking the blog http://smonscurseofthecrimsonthrone.blogspot.co.uk/ it was 64 sessions so 3.7 sessions/level on average, but that includes the rapid 1-3 and 11-12 bits.

Quote from: Haffrung;1027062Negatives:

* Ranged attacks are overpowered. I've had to houserule disadvantage on firing into melee or through combatants.
* On a related issue, I don't think I'll ever get used to Rogues being death-dealing strikers. The 5th level Rogue in my current group routinely does 20-30 damage per round with a hand crossbow.
* Looking up spells is still a big pain in the ass. Spell cards at the table are almost mandatory.
* It's really tough to challenge a party with a single monster. A party of five can focus so much fire in a single round that a solo monster doesn't stand a chance. This weekend I thought a Gorgon (AC 19, 114 HP, petrification attack, etc) would pose a tough challenge to the party of five 5th level PCs. Nope. They used summoned creatures to prevent it from charging or reaching petrification range and dropped it in two rounds with ranged attacks.
* The move-attack-move capabilties, along with attacks of opportunity, means combat is still vulnerable to annoying and gamey tactics.
* There's enough vulnerability in the PC options that we still have players doing using cheesy optimization. Maybe some guys will do that no matter the edition.

1: Firing into melee counts as at least half cover. +2 to the targets AC. A big creature might grant 3-quarter cover. +5.

2: Rogues can crank out alot of damage if they get surprise. And can keep that up if they can team up with someone else on a target. A 5th level Rogue with a dagger averages 14 before stat and/or item bonus for the sneak attack. Then drop down to average 3.5 if they cant team up or hide again. A fighter with a greatsword can crank out the same. But doesnt have to meet extra conditions to sustain that. A team of a Rogue and a Fighter can make mincemeat of an encounter if they work together.

3: Yes. Cards or a quick ref sheet. For fun I handed a wizard PCs player a Pocketmod booklet and told him to write down his spells in it, adding another pocket mod as each spell level was gained. Keep in mind about all the classes have some sort of limit on how many spells they can memorize. So it keeps things to a certain level. But index cards or pocketmod really helps.

4: So true! CR is is more a guideline than a hard gauge. For a group of 5 level 5 characters a CR 5 monster youd more likely need at least 2. And if the group has summons then than effectively increases the party. Even without the summons the encounter calculator rates it as an Easy encounter. And honestly I wouldnt be to irked at the players for using a good tactic as petrification can be a serious problem. At level 5 the only class with a summons is the Druid with conjure Animals. And even that knocks the encounter down to Trivial. And potentially lowers the EXP.

5: Havent run into that yet as we dont use minis and no one in the groups I am playing with or DMing for care to provoke opportunity attacks and equivalents. Everyone tends to get in and not dance around much unless necessary.

6: No game is immune to that.

Quote from: Daztur;1027168I remember a blog posts talking about nobles etc. being high level because of them doing a lot of hunting with lots of servants to make things easy for them as they had a constant stream of XP coming in. Which makes a certain amount of sense for some settings...

BX and AD&D nobles and constables seem to have a high tendency to be retired or part time adventurers. Cities in particular seem to be so harsh that half the encounters are creeping up there in levels in AD&D. But there are also nobles with no levels or equivalent level 1. Even the occasional farmer turns out to be a retired adventurer.

Quote from: S'mon;1027170For the kind of open table multi-GM transferable PCs type thing I'm running, XP is a vital mechanic. For a typical "1-15 quest for 5 PCs" type campaign levelling by milestones every few sessions is ok.

Mind you, I think every 2-3 sessions is too quick. Even when I ran my "Runelords of the Shattered Star" quest based campaign, PCs went from 1st to (highest) 18th level at generally about half that rate (using XP as written). Checking the blog http://smonscurseofthecrimsonthrone.blogspot.co.uk/ it was 64 sessions so 3.7 sessions/level on average, but that includes the rapid 1-3 and 11-12 bits.

We play once every 2-3 weeks, less frequently in the summer months. So for us, leveling rate is about real-world practicalities. Even leveling once every 2 sessions, our Princes of the Apocalypse campaign took well over a year. 64 sessions would take us more than three years.

Quote from: S'mon;1027170If they don't care about levelling, I'm happy for them to stay at 1st.

For the kind of open table multi-GM transferable PCs type thing I'm running, XP is a vital mechanic. For a typical "1-15 quest for 5 PCs" type campaign levelling by milestones every few sessions is ok.

Mind you, I think every 2-3 sessions is too quick. Even when I ran my "Runelords of the Shattered Star" quest based campaign, PCs went from 1st to (highest) 18th level at generally about half that rate (using XP as written). Checking the blog http://smonscurseofthecrimsonthrone.blogspot.co.uk/ it was 64 sessions so 3.7 sessions/level on average, but that includes the rapid 1-3 and 11-12 bits.

Well... now that you mention it one of the reasons I don't mind not giving players XP in 5e is that I like the low levels and by default they just zoom by. Most games I run level very slowly but the people I am playing with are cool with it and I am up front about it. Obviously doesn't work with all players and situations like yours with different GMs.

Quote from: Haffrung;1027185We play once every 2-3 weeks, less frequently in the summer months. So for us, leveling rate is about real-world practicalities. Even leveling once every 2 sessions, our Princes of the Apocalypse campaign took well over a year. 64 sessions would take us more than three years.

2-3 years is about what I like for a short campaign.

Quote from: S'mon;1026809The 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.

That was the goal.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1027488That was the goal.

I think it's something that's easy to miss, and I guess it was designed mostly with Adventurer's League in mind, but with my open table meetup I absolutely love being able to start newbs at 1st and see them try to survive alongside mid-level PCs... and often they do very well. Last session the AC 13 druid-1 got killed by a ghoul ambush, but his AC 18 Cleric-1 friend fended off all attacks & was able to recover his body, giving up the +1 warhammer he'd taken from the ghoul lair to pay for a raise dead.

Yes, in my own campaigns I often mix low-level and high-level adventurers. So I wanted to make sure to advise that this sort of play be viable in 5e.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1027915Yes, in my own campaigns I often mix low-level and high-level adventurers. So I wanted to make sure to advise that this sort of play be viable in 5e.

Well done mate.

Re the fast advancement, I had three new players at my table yesterday. They were amazed and delighted to survive an expedition to Stonehell's second level - especially as the veteran level 3 half orc Rogue got killed by ghouls - and even moreso to hit level 2 in one session. It occurred to me - and I said so - that the game seemed designed like a drug dealer getting his clients hooked with the whoosh of early rapid advancement, before settling down to a much slower pace.

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

Re milestones, I do give milestone & quest awards at 100 xp per level. So locating a new area of Stonehell dungeon on level 2 was worth 200 XP per PC yesterday.
This 100xlevel tends to promote 5e's rapid advancement at low level & slower later, which I like.

I tend to level my players every 3 sessions / 1 quest or so. But we play for "chunks" of 3 or 6 weeks at a time, then swap out to something else. I'm liking the idea of different levels though ... will have to give it some thought if it'll suit my set-up.

I threw out XP for roleplaying a long time ago. (And I only use milestones IMG these days anyway).

I don't want people to roleplay well, or badly. I just want them to have fun and the more fun they have the more they embed in their character. Scoring that just seems cruel, unusual, and very subjective.

I do toss out Inspiration chips for cool things players do, or something that makes us laugh, etc, that works great.

Quote from: Motorskills;1028002I threw out XP for roleplaying a long time ago. (And I only use milestones IMG these days anyway).

I don't want people to roleplay well, or badly. I just want them to have fun and the more fun they have the more they embed in their character. Scoring that just seems cruel, unusual, and very subjective.

I do toss out Inspiration chips for cool things players do, or something that makes us laugh, etc, that works great.

Yes, I find Inspiration is a much better award than XP for cool roleplay.

Quote from: S'mon;1027953Well done mate.

Re the fast advancement, I had three new players at my table yesterday. They were amazed and delighted to survive an expedition to Stonehell's second level - especially as the veteran level 3 half orc Rogue got killed by ghouls - and even moreso to hit level 2 in one session. It occurred to me - and I said so - that the game seemed designed like a drug dealer getting his clients hooked with the whoosh of early rapid advancement, before settling down to a much slower pace.

I used the exact same principle in Lion & Dragon. You start out as a 0-level nobody, which is very high-risk. But if you survive one adventure you hit level 1, which is the single biggest power-jump in the game. Two adventures after that you hit level 2, which can be a pretty tough character by that point.

Compared to other OSR games, characters in Lion & Dragon of levels 1-3 are generally somewhat more powerful than in most other rulesets, but when they get to higher level they tend to be somewhat less powerful (usually less hit points, for example, and slower saving throw progression) than in other rulesets.