Experience Question

[crub90706]

If an adventureing party gains enough xp in the middle of an adventure and decided to continue on instead of going back to town to train (or what ever) to raise in level, do they continue to gain xp? And if so would you allow tham to raise more than one level at a time if they got the xp to do so?

I ask because when I ran a party years ago through the G and D series, the party ended up leveling in the middle of G3 and instead of going back to town they insisted on going on. At the time I was unsure of how to handle the gain of further xp and if they would loose any excess.

Any thoughts?

[blackprinceofmuncie]

I'm moving this topic to the 1e BTB forum, since it's a rules question rather than a General Discussion topic.

[Matthew]

I believe that in several modules there are disclaimers about the "normal" levelling up process being unsuitable, but in the general case I do not allow player characters to accrue experience points beyond what is needed to achieve the next ability level. The DMG is a bit unclear as to what would happen if, for instance, a first level fighter gained 10,000 experience points, but I believe that my reading was the intent. Alternative interpretations include 1) "gaining the full sum, but no more", and 2) enough experience points to come just under the next ability level (so 4,000 in this case).

[Thorkhammer]

Matthew-- I do not believe the DMG is that "unclear" when it states...

ONCE A CHARACTER HAS POINTS WHICH ARE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE MINIMUM NUMBER NECESSARY TO MOVE UPWARDS IN EXPEREIENCE LEVEL, NO FURTHER EXPERIENCE POINTS CAN BE GAINED UNTIL THE CHARACTER ACTUALLY GAINS THE NEW LEVEL

p.86

How others interpret this is of no concern to me. How I do is to mean that, a charcter just shy of the next higher level, upon killing monsters and gaining treasure that would normally award him enough XP to rise to the next level will only gain enough to place him at the minimum required for that level or somewhere in its span of XP, at which point any further monster killing/loot gaining will gain him no further XP until he has, indeed gone back to town and undergone the appropriate "training" to "level up."

In Crub's example/situation, which is one of the all time classic misunderstandings of the game process itself, mitigating factors affect the mechanics.
1. In the G's & D's, for example, all the characters should be name level or better. Thus, not requiring to return home and find a "mentor" to train them. Thus, the normal process of levelling up is "bypassed"
2. Characters below name level in these adventures could call upon the higher ones to mentor them. But if none were available of a particular class (say no other rangers except for a L8 member) then he would be stuck. And the DM would have to make a ruling.
3. "Play" in this game (BTB 1E) dictates that, at no time should a character gain enough XP/& training to gain more than 1 level per adventure. In extended scenarios, like the G's, D's etc., the DM should chop sessions into such that, upon the party reaching such a point, the game effectively "ends" for the moment. He could, however, then have the group do some "down time" resting, regaining spells, repairing equipment, etc. and just kill a day or 2 before resuming "play."

I believe Crub's situation was easily resolvable by the DMG's instructions on the subject. It should not have been a mystery.

To me, it is a classic example of a DM not being aware of critical mechanics in the game and/or, undecisive about making a fiat ruling.

[Matthew]

Matthew-- I do not believe the DMG is that "unclear" when it states...

ONCE A CHARACTER HAS POINTS WHICH ARE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE MINIMUM NUMBER NECESSARY TO MOVE UPWARDS IN EXPERIENCE LEVEL, NO FURTHER EXPERIENCE POINTS CAN BE GAINED UNTIL THE CHARACTER ACTUALLY GAINS THE NEW LEVEL

p.86

How others interpret this is of no concern to me. How I do is to mean that, a character just shy of the next higher level, upon killing monsters and gaining treasure that would normally award him enough XP to rise to the next level will only gain enough to place him at the minimum required for that level or somewhere in its span of XP, at which point any further monster killing/loot gaining will gain him no further XP until he has, indeed gone back to town and undergone the appropriate "training" to "level up."

The question of what the meaning of this passage is has been debated a good number of times. What does equal to or greater than the minimum" mean when the immediately preceding passage says:

"Under no circumstances can a character gain additional experience points by any means until he or she actually acquires the higher level through the required training/study course. Thus, a character who successfully adventures and gains experience points which not only equal a new level but are almost sufficient to gain yet a second such level, cannot opt to-forego the period of training and study necessary to go up a level in favour of gaining a few more points and training and studying for two levels at once."

When are experience points awarded? At the end of a session, or in accordance with the further passage that states:

"Treasure must be physically taken out of the dungeon or lair and turned into a transportable medium or stored in the player's stronghold to be counted for experience points."

Are monster kills immediately reported and added? The DMG leaves that that up to the game master, but it only envisions a character ever gaining enough experience points to take him one and one-part of a level above the one he currently has achieved. It has no advice for what happens when a character gains enough experience points to advance two levels, which coupled with the latter passage creates significant (but hardly unresolvable) problems.

In Crub's example/situation, which is one of the all time classic misunderstandings of the game process itself, mitigating factors affect the mechanics.
1. In the G's & D's, for example, all the characters should be name level or better. Thus, not requiring to return home and find a "mentor" to train them. Thus, the normal process of levelling up is "bypassed"
2. Characters below name level in these adventures could call upon the higher ones to mentor them. But if none were available of a particular class (say no other rangers except for a L8 member) then he would be stuck. And the DM would have to make a ruling.
3. "Play" in this game (BTB 1E) dictates that, at no time should a character gain enough XP/& training to gain more than 1 level per adventure. In extended scenarios, like the G's, D's etc., the DM should chop sessions into such that, upon the party reaching such a point, the game effectively "ends" for the moment. He could, however, then have the group do some "down time" resting, regaining spells, repairing equipment, etc. and just kill a day or 2 before resuming "play."

I believe Crub's situation was easily resolvable by the DMG's instructions on the subject. It should not have been a mystery.

To me, it is a classic example of a DM not being aware of critical mechanics in the game and/or, undecisive about making a fiat ruling.

Apart from the fact that the sole cleric character provided with D1 is not of name level (and not to mention the time and cost still must be observed), the issue is not actually one of finding a trainer, because the problem is that treasure does not count for experience until "removed from the dungeon", at which point there may certainly be enough to progress several levels. Whatever happens, the game master is going to have to decide what to do. Of course, in all likelihood, neither the G and D series were written with the training rules in mind at all.

The intent seems rather obvious to me (which is that experience levels should not be gained too quickly, but neither should players be robbed of their rightly earned rewards), but not everybody will agree.

[Thorkhammer]

Yes...

I pretty much agree that--

1) The DMG actually says all those things.
2) Treasure is supposed to be physically removed before being turned into XP
3) The DM should divide the sessions/or session as such to create breaking points where he can then tally the monster's killed, with the aim of ensuring the party gains only enough to meet the minimum, or "just into" the XP spread of the next higher level, before stopping play and then taking the necessary steps to resolve "leveling"
4) The G's and D's were written before 1E/DMG and most likely--in Gary's mind--with the familiar mechanics of OE and his own houserules.
5) Enough precedent is set in OE and Holmes and just about everywhere else (probably in the DMG itself, though I lack the page number at the moment) prohibiting the gaining of more than one level "per session"...whatever that means.
6) DMs need to be on their game, or back out of the chair. It's that simple.

I don't see much disagreement between our 2 responses to Crub's post.

I do believe, however, that the answers he sought were in the book (DMG). It was then up to him how to interpret/implement them.

[ScottyG]

I think that once you get into the D section of the series, you need to consider the environment and what "dungeon" means. I'd consider much of the series as wilderness moreso than dungeon, and I'd grant XP whenever the party rested in a camp that wasn't within another defined area of the 'underdark'. It hasn't happened yet, so I haven't given any thought on how I'd handle gaining levels. Probably follow the recomendation from S4 and waive the normal requirements due to the special circumstances.

[Thorkhammer]

The question of "waiving" is brought up.

I, personally, do not agree with this concept if my mind is thinking BTB (notice, the forum we are in, please). So I do not, really, care what Gary allowed in the S4, per se. He wrote a lot of things from his Homebrew POV; we'yal know it.

But, certainly, "resting" somewhere away from action and "down time" I brought up. So I see others have considered this as well.

In a 1-off, then BTB mechanics need not apply. Dm fiat, in such a case.

In a continuous campaign...? They most certainly do, if one is going BTB.

[Matthew]

I don't see much disagreement between our 2 responses to Crub's post.

I do believe, however, that the answers he sought were in the book (DMG). It was then up to him how to interpret/implement them.

Well, yeah, but surely it was you who presented your opinions as though they were contradictory to what I wrote, so I attempted to clarify my meaning. The text and its intent are not always in perfect harmony. Personally I do not allow experience to accrue beyond the total needed to reach the next ability level, but accept that the text allows for alternative takes on the matter. The related question of dungeon and treasure storage is simply something that has to be addressed outside of the expected paradigm of the DMG.

I think that once you get into the D section of the series, you need to consider the environment and what "dungeon" means. I'd consider much of the series as wilderness moreso than dungeon, and I'd grant XP whenever the party rested in a camp that wasn't within another defined area of the 'underdark'. It hasn't happened yet, so I haven't given any thought on how I'd handle gaining levels. Probably follow the recommendation from S4 and waive the normal requirements due to the special circumstances.

Yes, indeed. In unusual cases, the spirit of the rules should be the guiding principle, rather than adherence to the letter laid down in the books. Depending on how much level advancement is envisioned in the course of an extended adventure like D1-3, some reasonable provision can be made to deal with it.

[ScottyG]

The question of "waiving" is brought up.

I, personally, do not agree with this concept if my mind is thinking BTB (notice, the forum we are in, please). So I do not, really, care what Gary allowed in the S4, per se. He wrote a lot of things from his Homebrew POV; we'yal know it.

But, certainly, "resting" somewhere away from action and "down time" I brought up. So I see others have considered this as well.

In a 1-off, then BTB mechanics need not apply. Dm fiat, in such a case.

In a continuous campaign...? They most certainly do, if one is going BTB.

Whose book? Your book? I consider modules to be extensions/addendums/etc. of the books. I can think of multiple instances where these rules have been modified based on the circumstances of the adventure. I consider it a common sense based addendum to the book, as opposed to a Homebrew POV.
No amount of resting and downtime in a barren cave is going to replicate the conditions/requirements detailed in the training section anyways, so if you’re going to be making exceptions, whose to say where the line is drawn?

[Thorkhammer]

Scotty--

I refer you to my thread in "Theory" regarding HP.

In it, I am frustratingly trying to explore WTF this whole thing means. By "thing" I mean, 1E AD&D.

The more I explore the more I realize that 1E is just a sandbox (in the minds of the vast majority) tool, no more and no less than OE, Holmes, BX, BECMI.

I have a funny feeling in my gut, that its self-declared purpose was not, originally, the case.

[crub90706]

Thanks for the responses. I'd like to say at the time we were playing this I was still a very inexperienced DM. Admitently I had not yet read every rule or page of the DMG. Ultimatly I had allowed the players to level up once they had reached the undeedark city in D1, mainly because they had been pressuring me about it at this time, and if I remember corectlly (this was over 22 years ago) I had allowed the characters to keep enough xp to take them half way to the next level. Though this upsetted a few of the players who had accured a bit more experience then that we finally decided that thids was a resonable comprimise.

As I look back all their complaints became moot since all but 2 of the PCs ended up dieing in D1 and returned to the surface anyway to pick upmore comrades anyways.

[Matthew]

Heh, heh; yeah, funny how often things turn out like that. Most of the time in practice I am kinder than in theory, since the theory is only there as a guideline. If a party of first level characters earned 1,500 experience points each, for instance, I would probably allow the thief to keep the excess. The point, really though, is that characters should be receiving points in much smaller chunks on the whole, but in sandbox style play there is always the possibility it just will not work out like that.

[ScottyG]

Not official, but the way EGG said he handled it in practice: After the expedition, if you gained more than you needed to level you kept it all, unless you gained enough to gain two levels. Anything in excess of what you needed to gain two levels, minus 100 points, was lost. For example, a new fighter starts out with some higher level PCs. They gain 5,000 XPs each, except the new fighter, who would only get 3,901. No additional XP could be earned until the training for the level gained was completed.