I read a very good post today over at Cyclopeatron that discussed character advancement (leveling) in old-school fantasy games (OD&D, Swords & Wizardry, Labyrinth Lord, etc.), how it tends to drag out too long if the rules are followed by the book and also several possibilities on how to speed things up a bit. I think this is something we have all faced, and it is a legitimate gripe. Making the leveling process too easy causes the game feel diluted and boring, but making it too hard causes the game to seem tedious, frustrating and again boring. Advancing your character through the levels should be fun and feel rewarding. So, what is the answer to this age old dilemma?
I have approached character advancement several different ways over the years, and these are the main three that come to mind:
- By the Book - this, of course, is leveling the way it is written. This worked back in the day when I had all the time in the world to play D&D. These were the days of marathon-weekend-gaming-sessions that would last for days on end, all with little or no sleep. I no longer play in this fashion, nor do I wish to. I'm too old, so this method is no longer relevant to my style of play. I have used this method maybe a handful of times in the past decade...
- Abstract Reward - this was a method I used when running many a 2nd edition AD&D game back in the 90's. There was really no tried-and-true way of rewarding experience (XPs) with this method, but it wasn't so abstract that it was just a number I pulled off the top of my head. Well, I guess it was, but there was reasoning behind it. I would come up with a total XP value for the game session by looking over the encounters the party faced, the treasure that was found, what the characters needed to achieve the next level and I came up with a nice round number. I also evaluated each player on the effort they put out during each session and awarded additional XPs accordingly. Their current level had everything to do with how many XPs were awarded. Needless to say I tended to be a lot more generous with experience rewards then I would have if I had calculated them by the book, but not so much that the game felt easy or compromised. No one ever complained when I used this method, and it made my life much easier behind the screen.
- Game Sessions Equal Levels - this is my latest method for advancing the characters through the levels. The idea is that each level is no longer tied to a set experience point total, but valued by an equaling amount of game sessions. Levels are seen as cumulative in this method in relation to game sessions, so Level 1 equals one game session, but Level 3 would require six game sessions to achieve. I like to run each player through an introductory session, which helps flesh out their character's background and establish a bit of history. This could take anywhere from ten or fifteen minutes up to an hour. Mainly, we just sit and discuss the character's background, and overall concept. Dice are never rolled, but I do try to get the player in the right mindset with some roleplaying. Technically, the characters are not considered level 1 during this session. Completing this introductory solo "adventure" brings their characters to Level 1, so the first session gains them one level. To achieve Level 2 the characters will need to complete two more game sessions. Three additional game sessions for Level 3, and so on. It would take 55 total game sessions to achieve 10th Level using this method.
Of these, I like the Game Sessions Equal Levels method the best. My players seem to enjoy this method as well. Cyclopeatron mentioned that it had taken ten four-hour sessions to advance the party to Level 2. Using the Game Sessions Equal Levels method the party would have been Level 4 after ten sessions (1+2+3+4=10).
Now, I haven't done the math to see how it compares to the official way to gain experience, but it seems to work well for my games. From a game master standpoint I like this method mainly because I subscribe to the E6 philosophy that the sweet spot in the game tends to fall somewhere between Levels 5 and 8, and using this method allows me to advance the characters quickly to the sweet spot, and keep them there for a while. This method is abstract in the sense that there is no reason to tally up experience points anymore, but having the system in place still gives the players a goal to work towards. And we all know that establishing set goals keeps a game moving along...
12 comments:
For the playtest of my Flint and Flame game I've had characters level up after every adventure. Granted i wanted to level the party faster then normal so I could test the High level and generational stuff, but it worked wonderfully. One concern I have would be classes with differing XP progression. In the F&F game everone has the same XP chart, but what about LL?
Admittedly leveling characters with the Game Sessions Equal Levels method throws a wrench into the differing XP progression scheme, but honestly this is one thing I never liked in the first place. I know it was put in place to try to bring some sort of balance to the game, but honestly I am not so sure that it really ever did. I am sure someone somewhere has a blog post that proves me wrong, and I would like to read an analysis on this issue.
In the grand scheme of things using this method for leveling characters has not been an issue as of yet. Or at least no one has complained yet. I have used it for 2nd edition AD&D, 3rd edition, Castles & Crusades, d20 Conan and Labyrinth Lord.
I've been looking at White Box plus Greyhawk this week, and I'm amazed to read Gygax saying "100 xp per hd is ridiculous. It should be 10 xp" (paraphrasing a bit).
Look, GG and company gamed every week and often more. If you play that much, then sure. I'm lucky to get a four hour weeknight session in twice a month. So I for sure think that the amount of time spent on a campaign should count for something. That is my single biggest factor in considering experience beyond the treasure and monster killing. Yeah, I guess I'm saying that the less you play, the more experience the players should get. Life is short.
Oh, by the way, the Game sessions equal Levels concept (6 games equal 3 levels, etc) actually turns out to be around how often PC's go up a level with what I give out in xp. Not a bad way at all to look at it. I'll always want to be able to give out xp for personal character growth etc. There should be rewards to go after besides just automatically going up every few games. My players know I award xp for making the game more fun for others, and that's the most rewarding to give as well as recieve (ok, now I'm getting sappy).
This was similar to how WotC's The Wheel of Time RPG game worked. It was basically 3E with specific rules for Robert Jordan's world, and it didn't bother with xp at all; you just leveled everyone up every 'x' sessions. Since I was running a very role-playing intensive campaign at the time, with lots of political intrigue, it was the only way to go.
For an old-school dungeon delve, I still prefer the traditional method of leveling. I find that it emphasizes all the qualities I enjoy in a dungeon delve: namely self-serving greed and avarice. I prefer a slower rate of leveling anyway.
Being something of a "new school" gamer who got started in the "old school" era, I love abstract XP. I find games like LL to be a wonderful rules light system, but the (in my mind) antiquated system of rewarding xps for killing and looting has to go.
Switching the xp reward to another method encourages role-playing, exploration and other kinds of adventuring.
Kudos, sir, for you fine method.
I see that you played 2e. I really liked that system. I know it gets a bad rap for being to squeaky clean and story oriented, but I really like the incredible settings that came out for it.
Peace,
Christian
I like your method a lot and I'll probably adopt something like it. The only downside I can think of is that it nullifies the different advancement rates for the different classes. But to be honest, I'm not sure this is a big deal.
@Brunomac - I am not sure what my gaming schedule will look like with my new crew, but my previous gaming group was lucky to meet three times a month, and real lucky if we could meet every week. We normally played on Sunday nights for four hours. We would get a lot accomplished during these four hours, but there were many games where we would not have even one combat because of exploration or intensive roleplay. This is where the combat equals experience model really becomes a hindrance, and one of the reasons I decided to adopt the method of advancement that I did.
@Sean - Wheel of Time is a game I never have checked out. Once again you have me off to begin investigating another game. And I love you for it! Keep up the good work! ;-)
@Christian - "Being something of a "new school" gamer who got started in the "old school" era" -- yeah I am with you on that. I love a lot of gaming concepts that take our hobby and look at the rules from a different angle. FATE is one such game, and I LOVE the idea of Aspects. Actually, there are a lot of "abstract" rules from new games that I am intrigued with. I find it fun to try and adapt those rules to work with old-school D&D.
@cyclopeatron - yes, it does play against the varying advancement charts for the different classes. This is something I think 3rd edition got right. The unified advancement charts made so much sense to me when I first read them. Perhaps one justification for using this method with OD&D, Labyrinth Lord or Swords & Wizardry is that the ease of use out ways the balance issues it might or might not present.
I use a similar system for level advancement . . .
No calculating XP and
no rewarding of ridiculous amounts of treasure or magic
just to help characters reach the next level.
In general, players spend 1 game session for each CURRENT level of play; thereby, producing an ascending requirement for level advancement , i.e.,
3 sessions if current level is three,
4 sessions if current level is four,
5 sessions if current level is five,
and so on.
Hence, in the absence of extraordinary circumstances,
PC advancement is rapid early on,
Slowing down as characters reach higher levels
@Clovis: I like your idea on advancement rate; it gets characters through the vulnerable low levels quickly, but slows the game down nicely at higher levels. I might have to try this out!
I found it simply amazing that you mentioned this on C's post. I had just suggested something similar on Grognarida (I think) since I had considered it briefly while tinkering with my Roll to Advance. I decided against it because of the already-mentioned loss of different advance rates between classes. I happen to think that those differences are important, but I did consider adding some modifiers for the various classes to the base system.
I am pretty sure that I had never heard of such a system before, but it makes sense and I'm not surprised to see that it's been thought of before.
I guess my experience may not be common, but we are in a B/X D&D game right now, and our characters basically *have* been leveling up once a session, and this is by the book. 3-4 hour games, once a week, exploring a megadungeon that was generated by random rolls from the rulebook's charts. I was told we somehow managed to go straight to the largest treasures in the level, but still, it was by the book as far as stocking the dungeon goes... so slow leveling is not necessarily a given with old school rules.
Personally, I'd rather stay at low levels by the book than level up via "artificial" advancement methods, though. Who cares what level anyone is as long as the game remains fun?
Post a Comment