From: yt1@eng.cam.ac.uk (Y. Tremblay)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Levels (was: Re: Anecdotes... Death... How come?)
Date: 14 Aug 92 11:48:21 GMT
Organization: Cambridge University Engineering Department, UK

In article <4727@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) writes:
>In article <Bsy52x.py@acsu.buffalo.edu> swann@acsu.buffalo.edu (Stephen Swann) writes:
>>In article <4709@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) writes:
>>Part of the reason they've advanced so slowly is that an awful lot 
>>of their time is spent pursuing "sub-plots" in my campaign.  This
>>involves lots of roleplaying, but doesn't earn them any adventuring
>>experience points - although it does gain them valuable information,
>>and generally make their lives more interesting and varied.
>
>	Ah. I consider roleplaying to be experience. For ANY class.
>The more you interact with the world, the more you learn... and it's
>GENERAL experience that applies to ALL classes. Some of the biggest
>experience awards come from fantastic roleplaying/politics/etc.
>
    But, why don't you give any experience for roleplaying, solving a 
plot ?  If it is what you want your player to do, then you should give
them something for doing it.  Players are human, they won't do something 
for nothing even if you say that they get advancement in the character
concept/personality/background.  If (in "real life" (tm)) a company offer
me a job intellectually interesting but without any salary, I say them:
"f***".  I don't want to work in a factory but I want decent wage.  The
way you give experience points (IMHO) encourage hack'n slash since it is
the only way to get a concrete award.  But maybe you have exceptional 
players...

>>Once again, like the discussion of "levels" above, it's a matter of
>>how you rate significance.  Even though these guys' characters are
>>"only" 12th level, nevertheless they're very important people in my
>>campaign.  They are the highest level adventuring party currently
>>operating therein, and so they often get to partake in (or be the
>>cause of :-) all the greatest events.
>
>	Yep, they are NOW. But you mention later on that their first
>"BIG" adventure was at 8-9th level. Taking the average 7 month
>advancement time you mentioned, that means that they were playing for over
>FOUR YEARS before doing major adventures. I want to be a HERO, not
>some apprentice who needs to take enough REAL WORLD time to finish
>a bachelor's degree before he can even do something significant.
>
    I have to agree with Sea Wasp here.  Maybe it is not a problem for 
some of you that have been playing/GMing since the second world war (*)
and decide their future according to the playing group but in my case, I 
tend to move more often than every four years and I like my characters or
campaigns to see some ""BIG" adventure" before I leave it. ( Just a question:
what does a first level mage during the first 7 months ? :-)

>	My players tend to get involved in major problems even at
>low level... then they have to start scrambling for ways to
>handle it...
>
     Should we call your campaign "Monthy Haul" ? :-)  Really, as Patrick
Rannou said some time ago, Monthy Haul at the origin means a campaign where
characters have to "save the world".  It has nothing to do with "munchkins"
but a lot of people seems to forget it here.  It is just an opposition with
a campaign where characters wander around doing what they feel like, nothing
having a major impact on the world.  The difference between my action on 
the world and Bush actions.  

     I like the way Sea Wasp says he involves players in major events at
low level.  But he has to recognize that at low level, their power to 
solve such problem is limited.  They have to gain levels before being able
to play an important part.  However, they can still be involved.  It
applies with political solutions too.  Which ruler would listen a first 
level character ?  A character that has a reputation behind him however...


Yannick