This thread really shows the problem of using XP as an award (and maybe of using XP at all). XP is a party reward not a personal one (especially in 4e). If the DM wants to reward players for good RP or creative play, which I great support, there are other ways than with XP.
I agree. XP is essentially a pacing mechanism; you need to undertake X encounters of Y difficulty, with X and Y inversely proportional, before you gain a level. It is by and large unnecessary.
Well put. Because the game is trying to emulate a certain style, it's full of pacing mechanisms. Attack rolls, damage, and HP are pacing mechanisms as well and, in certain circumstances, can be dispensed with.
[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy
This thread really shows the problem of using XP as an award (and maybe of using XP at all). XP is a party reward not a personal one (especially in 4e). If the DM wants to reward players for good RP or creative play, which I great support, there are other ways than with XP.
I agree. XP is essentially a pacing mechanism; you need to undertake X encounters of Y difficulty, with X and Y inversely proportional, before you gain a level. It is by and large unnecessary.
Well put. Because the game is trying to emulate a certain style, it's full of pacing mechanisms. Attack rolls, damage, and HP are pacing mechanisms as well and, in certain circumstances, can be dispensed with.
Players could simply remain at level 1 and never improve. Problem solved. Instead of giving XP they could give attack bonuses. More powerful spells. Better saving throws. Special abilities. Oh wait. That's what XP does.
A rogue with a bowl of slop can be a controller.
WIZARD PC: Can I substitute Celestial Roc Guano for my fireball spells? DM: Awesome. Yes.
This thread really shows the problem of using XP as an award (and maybe of using XP at all). XP is a party reward not a personal one (especially in 4e). If the DM wants to reward players for good RP or creative play, which I great support, there are other ways than with XP.
I agree. XP is essentially a pacing mechanism; you need to undertake X encounters of Y difficulty, with X and Y inversely proportional, before you gain a level. It is by and large unnecessary.
Well put. Because the game is trying to emulate a certain style, it's full of pacing mechanisms. Attack rolls, damage, and HP are pacing mechanisms as well and, in certain circumstances, can be dispensed with.
Players could simply remain at level 1 and never improve. Problem solved. Instead of giving XP they could give attack bonuses. More powerful spells. Better saving throws. Special abilities. Oh wait. That's what XP does.
Goodness, you just don't get it. Good bye.
[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy
If he's way too high level, it does cause some problems. Remember the animated Beowulf? His whole crew was torn to shreds before he ever woke up from his drunken stupor. Not cool for those guys.
Is he high enough level to have a cohort or followers? Let him play one of those if he has one. They probably need some personality anyway. Something other than... "My cohort cleric heals me. My cohort wizard teleports me to where I want to go. My cohort dwarven expert just made me some awesome armor as a gift! My cohort fighter tastes the wine before I buy it."
I tend to throw mixed encounters and focus more on role-playing than combat when the party is widely spaced in levels. The high-level guy is faced off with a long drawn out fight with the leader while the other characters deal with his numerous minions. Sometimes it can't be helped. The high level guy steals the show in some situations. Focus on letting the low level guys have a chance to do the one thing they're really good at. The high level guy can't be in two places at the same time.
You can also split the party. This takes some skill as a director. Just before a fight, just after a fight. Just as the party comes to a strange rune-covered door. Right after the sphinx asks a crazy riddle... give the players a moment to think, in other words.
Try not to put them in environments where the low-level guys can't possibly survive, such as the elemental plane of fire, for instance.
As a player, I don't mind the challenge. It's especially gratifying when your low level guy outshines some epic guy because of clever playing. The low level rogue who manages to evade a pit-fiend's meteor swarm and then tricks the devil into making a terrible mistake, the low level paladin who leads the terrasque onto a dam that can't support his weight, washing the beast out into a steep ravine, the level 1 mage who gets a critical hit with a ray of frost on a wounded salamander in time to save his high level companion from being crushed and burned to death. These are all heroes of legend. No guts no glory.
A rogue with a bowl of slop can be a controller.
WIZARD PC: Can I substitute Celestial Roc Guano for my fireball spells? DM: Awesome. Yes.
This thread really shows the problem of using XP as an award (and maybe of using XP at all). XP is a party reward not a personal one (especially in 4e). If the DM wants to reward players for good RP or creative play, which I great support, there are other ways than with XP.
I agree. XP is essentially a pacing mechanism; you need to undertake X encounters of Y difficulty, with X and Y inversely proportional, before you gain a level. It is by and large unnecessary.
Well put. Because the game is trying to emulate a certain style, it's full of pacing mechanisms. Attack rolls, damage, and HP are pacing mechanisms as well and, in certain circumstances, can be dispensed with.
Players could simply remain at level 1 and never improve. Problem solved. Instead of giving XP they could give attack bonuses. More powerful spells. Better saving throws. Special abilities. Oh wait. That's what XP does.
Goodness, you just don't get it. Good bye.
Not much to get.
If you mean rewards such as honors, titles, a peak in the high wizard's spell book, a gift from the high priest, something as simple as an honorific, such as Sir John the Valiant... yes I get that.
If as a pacing mechanism, you mean the DM can say when levels are gained, I get that too. The point system itself is arbitrary, but using the point system as a gauge, the DM sets the pace. Most players can see the relationship between getting XP and getting more powerful. They can see that getting BONUS XP is a reward... a pretty darn good one. Without XP, the characters are kind of in limbo about it.
To say that XP is a problem as a reward mechanism... there's been nothing said here to support that. It's not always the best reward, granted... but it's a good default. I'll go on a limb and say it's a good default for most DMs and players.
But what you said: Because the game is trying to emulate a certain style, it's full of pacing mechanisms. Attack rolls, damage, and HP are pacing mechanisms as well and, in certain circumstances, can be dispensed with.
Have you turned this into yet another "Heroes should never be in danger" argument? Yeah. I don't get that.
A rogue with a bowl of slop can be a controller.
WIZARD PC: Can I substitute Celestial Roc Guano for my fireball spells? DM: Awesome. Yes.
Talk to your DM about alternate goals in combat. If it's something that the higher-level character should do, then the lower level ones can fend of the monsters. If the monster is too tough for the weaker characters, then they can be the one accomplishing the primary goal. For example. The key is having more than one thing going on.
Or be the same level and still do that. Because it really sucks to always be the guy relegated to the "easy task" at table. Having alternate win conditions should be part of your sig Centauri, but it isn't the only solution to every combat problem. A good solution, but not the only.
Precisely. the PCs are supposed to be equal teammates, not 'Bob and the Sidekicks Three'.
Who said anything about the primary task being the "easy task"?
Sorry it took me a bit to respond to this, I missed this thread until Crowe mind-vomited in it.
The problem is not whether the task is easier or not, it is the perception of that task. If the higher level character is doing something different from the lower level characters, even if the lower level task is harder it is seen as them being sidekicks to the "heroic" character.
Currently working on making a Dex based defender. Check it out here Spoiler:Show
Need a few pre-generated characters for a one-shot you are running? Want to get a baseline for what an effective build for a class you aren't familiar with? Check out the Pregen thread here If ever you are interested what it sounds like to be at my table check out my blog and podcast here Also, I've recently done an episode on "Refluffing". You can check that out here
This thread really shows the problem of using XP as an award (and maybe of using XP at all). XP is a party reward not a personal one (especially in 4e). If the DM wants to reward players for good RP or creative play, which I great support, there are other ways than with XP.
I agree. XP is essentially a pacing mechanism; you need to undertake X encounters of Y difficulty, with X and Y inversely proportional, before you gain a level. It is by and large unnecessary.
Well put. Because the game is trying to emulate a certain style, it's full of pacing mechanisms. Attack rolls, damage, and HP are pacing mechanisms as well and, in certain circumstances, can be dispensed with.
Players could simply remain at level 1 and never improve. Problem solved. Instead of giving XP they could give attack bonuses. More powerful spells. Better saving throws. Special abilities. Oh wait. That's what XP does.
Or you can just say 'we level up now' without worrying about the annoying accounting issues.
Talk to your DM about alternate goals in combat. If it's something that the higher-level character should do, then the lower level ones can fend of the monsters. If the monster is too tough for the weaker characters, then they can be the one accomplishing the primary goal. For example. The key is having more than one thing going on.
Or be the same level and still do that. Because it really sucks to always be the guy relegated to the "easy task" at table. Having alternate win conditions should be part of your sig Centauri, but it isn't the only solution to every combat problem. A good solution, but not the only.
Precisely. the PCs are supposed to be equal teammates, not 'Bob and the Sidekicks Three'.
Who said anything about the primary task being the "easy task"?
Sorry it took me a bit to respond to this, I missed this thread until Crowe mind-vomited in it.
The problem is not whether the task is easier or not, it is the perception of that task. If the higher level character is doing something different from the lower level characters, even if the lower level task is harder it is seen as them being sidekicks to the "heroic" character.
Put some keoghtom's ointment on that sensitive skin.
Level Differences Stink, But You Don't Have To!
Many are the problems that having characters with level variations can present. The low level guys have a high mortality rate and certain environments are impossible for the peon to endure. The high level guys get to be the heroes, and the low level guys tend to become sidekicks. Hopefully I might present for you a variety of possible solutions.
Some will tell you that getting rid of XP entirely is the solution. I disagree. Using XP as a gauge of success, while not the only solution, has been the default solution since the earliest days of role-playing games and many players see XP as a meaningful reward system. Many DMs also find that having XP as a reward system allows them to encourage type of play that they makes the game more enjoyable for them.
One out-of-the-box solution is to keep everyone at the same level through the whole campaign. It is an unusual solution, which I thought of in jest. Even so, it's so crazy it just might work, but dramatically changes the way the game is played.
However, I believe the current problem is that your existing characters within the campaign are varied widely in their level of power. Some players might feel like sidekicks. The challenges that the high level character can handle easily require more clever tactics for the lower level character who typically has less options.
Some of the challenges are absolutely impossible for low-level characters to handle. Outer Plane adventures in which a low level character absolutely can not survive, such as the typical plane of fire should be avoided.
Other challenges are nearly impossible. A terrasque, for instance, has powerful combat abilities. Worse, it is able to outwit your average player. Only a fast horse or slow friends will allow for a chance to escape. A fast horse with a brave level 1 rider on it can lure the monster away from its path toward the city it is making a bee-line for. That should be worth some XP AND a key to the city... good for one free beer. If the EPIC guy wants to chase it down and hack and slash at it, let him. I'm going to get that free beer.
There are quite a few non-combat situations where being an epic level barbarian doesn't necessarily help as much as being able to read ancient Zjizza'arrian runes (whatever they are). Find skills unique to the low levels. Make them important to the story so they have a REAs.
A simple solution is to simply split the party. I know this goes against the old code of everybody stick together, but parties split all the time. It's only a matter of knowing when to cut back to the other group. Both characters can be working on the same problem. One group may be diplomatically asking for help fighting an approaching monster horde, while the other group is actually in the trenches with the monsters.
Another solution is to let the players play cohorts and followers if they are of a higher level than the main character they would normally play. It has the added benefit of giving personality to the cohort, which is often nothing more than a pack-mule for the main character.
There are two competing philosophies on this subject. One philosophy is that no character should EVER, under any circumstances, actually be challenged. It is an unorthodox approach that some find enjoyable. I call this the nothing-really-matters philosophy. It's not one for me, but it seems to be growing in popularity. I have no examples of this philosophy in action, so I will leave that to its adherents to espouse its virtues.
Another philosophy is that the players might actually enjoy this chance at overcoming difficult challenges. I call this the no-guts-no-glory approach. It's not for the faint of heart apparently, but some have found it more rewarding. It is an approach that goes back to the great philosopher Og of the Big Cave (9,594 BC - 9,571 BC). One day, he killed a mammoth, WAY beyond his level as far as challenge ratings. He was rewarded with food and finally gained the notice of a certain Unga of The Small Cave, who was the belle of the ball among the Unga-Bunga Cave People. There is one particular group of people who have found a certain satisfaction with accomplishing great things despite adversity: nearly everyone.
To summarize: 1 - Changing the entire tradition of having level differences is an option requiring all characters to be of the same power always which is game balance taken to an extreme. I don't recommend this one. 2 - Make challenges and obstacles that are not level dependent, but require role-playing instead. This is an easier, more implementable solution. 3 - Eliminate impossible-to-survive situations that low-level characters simply can not overcome no matter how clever they are. 4 - Split the party, even if that goes against the "prime directive". This is the most easily implementable solution and is doubly good because phone addicts can check their phone messages between scenes. 5 - Play cohorts or followers if they are higher level than the main characters, if the players are agreeable. 6 - Eliminate ALL challenges so that levels don't matter. This is a back-door approach some use. I have used the approach myself. It is called deus ex machina, the equivalent of superman swooping in at the last minute to catch the crossbow the almost took out the main character. I found that players tend to resent the intrusion, but others have found greater success with the technique. I don't personally recommend it. 7 - An experienced or particularly clever player can overcome more challenges than you might realize. Some might actually appreciate the challenge. Few people remember an epic-level character killing random orc number 2. But a level 2 rogue defeats a pit-fiend with a cloak? This I gotta hear! If the player is willing to shoot for the moon, don't close the window.
A rogue with a bowl of slop can be a controller.
WIZARD PC: Can I substitute Celestial Roc Guano for my fireball spells? DM: Awesome. Yes.
This thread really shows the problem of using XP as an award (and maybe of using XP at all). XP is a party reward not a personal one (especially in 4e). If the DM wants to reward players for good RP or creative play, which I great support, there are other ways than with XP.
I agree. XP is essentially a pacing mechanism; you need to undertake X encounters of Y difficulty, with X and Y inversely proportional, before you gain a level. It is by and large unnecessary.
Well put. Because the game is trying to emulate a certain style, it's full of pacing mechanisms. Attack rolls, damage, and HP are pacing mechanisms as well and, in certain circumstances, can be dispensed with.
Players could simply remain at level 1 and never improve. Problem solved. Instead of giving XP they could give attack bonuses. More powerful spells. Better saving throws. Special abilities. Oh wait. That's what XP does.
Or you can just say 'we level up now' without worrying about the annoying accounting issues.
What I found is that if a character gains a bunch of levels at once, he/she doesn't get a chance to 'grow into' them. And without a gradual change, becomes a totally different identity.
A lowly but ambitious wizard who sucks up to higher level wizards is a different character than one who is now an archmage.
If the players and DM can make that work for them, then 'catching up the party' is a great solution.
I did this once and the players involved didn't mind... he wanted to jump in with his epic character... not to lord it over the party but because he really wanted to play the character. I presented a story line that he had just had a major battle with an energy-draining creature and is currently weakened. He played the character with a bunch of negative levels and I tied in getting his levels back as part of the existing quest. Fun was had by all.
A rogue with a bowl of slop can be a controller.
WIZARD PC: Can I substitute Celestial Roc Guano for my fireball spells? DM: Awesome. Yes.
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />If it is a level or two it isn't a huge impact but should get dealt with soon. Keep in mind that (t least in 3.x) the xp required to level increased as you get higher in level, so as long as the group stays close it would self correct to an extent.
Furthermore, if one is using the 3e XP system, it has an auto-correct feature in the math; a character who is lower level than another will receive more XP from an encounter.
true
A rogue with a bowl of slop can be a controller.
WIZARD PC: Can I substitute Celestial Roc Guano for my fireball spells? DM: Awesome. Yes.
