Palladium Level Cap

[GMDijarian]

Hey everyone Im back after a long stay away and was wondering the other day:

Has anyone, playing a serious and honest character, ever made it to the peak end of 15th level? Ive run two year and a half campaigns weekly for hours at a time and it seems the characters max at just about 8th level by the end of the campaigns. So just wondering. Any stories?

[TheGameMaster]

Hey everyone Im back after a long stay away and was wondering the other day:

Has anyone, playing a serious and honest character, ever made it to the peak end of 15th level? Ive run two year and a half campaigns weekly for hours at a time and it seems the characters max at just about 8th level by the end of the campaigns. So just wondering. Any stories?

I have yet to get a character that high, (but if I had gotten to play as much as you I might have, you lucky dog) I think it would take several campaigns to get there, unless there is an epic campaign that could last that long.

[Damian Magecraft]

Hey everyone Im back after a long stay away and was wondering the other day:

Has anyone, playing a serious and honest character, ever made it to the peak end of 15th level? Ive run two year and a half campaigns weekly for hours at a time and it seems the characters max at just about 8th level by the end of the campaigns. So just wondering. Any stories?

Only when I have altered how exp worked (fiddling around with core mechanics never works well).

[Goliath Strongarm]

I've had several characters that have passed 15. Iirc, the record for a party I've been in is around level 60. It's not actually that difficult, if you're getting credit for everything based on the chart in the book, especially if you're playing "good" characters.

Risking selves, saving groups of people, endangering own lives to save others, defeating opponents, etc etc etc. It all adds up, quickly. Depending on how liberal your GM is, each one of those minions is a "minor threat", while the villian himself is a "major threat" or a "great threat". If there's 20 minions plus the villian, thats 575-1300. And that doesn't count everything up until then. Every swing of the sword is a skill use. Every parry is a skill use. Etc etc etc. It all adds up, quickly. Again, for a liberal GM, every time you talk, that's a skill use. If you strictly follow that chart, levelling does NOT take that long.

If you can manage to get the group focused (kind of like herding wet cats, I know), you can push through missions/adventures/campaigns. The better everyone in your group knows each other and the type of characters also helps. the more you have to look up your abilities, the slower it goes.

The same group of players as above, back in 1st ed days, managed to get through gersidi in 3 hours. That included dealing with the neighboring lord, and wiping out everything inside. We started at level 1, finished at like 8 or 9.

So all said, it all depends on how your GM follows the chart. If your GM also has bonus things, it can be even faster. Bonus exp for the whoever brought the sodas that week, bonus for "s&^%s and giggles", etc.

[TheGameMaster]

I noticed that when you go by the chart, it could only take one short campaign to get everyone at really high levels. The way I do it when I'm
GMing (which is most of the time) I keep mental track of things my PCs have done, and at the end of a side quest or adventure when they are sort of inbetween jobs or whatever and there is that sort of down time that the PCs are just on the road or waiting for something, that is when they level up if I feel thay have done enough to level up, I just use the chart as a reference tool to give me an idea of about how much their actions were worth.

[The Dark Elf]

Ive been GMing the same characters in one campaign for well over a decade and although they are multiple OCC's the equivalent xp would make them lvl 11-12 at the most!

[Goliath Strongarm]

Ive been GMing the same characters in one campaign for well over a decade and although they are multiple OCC's the equivalent xp would make them lvl 11-12 at the most!

Back in my HS days (which granted, were a while ago) we averaged about 20 hours of gaming a week. Inside a couple of months we would have chars that had hit 15+.

If you have characters going that long, and are only 11-12, then you might need to seriously look at 2 things- how stingy are you being with the exp, and how much distraction/NON-Gaming are you guys doing?

Seriously, most PCs should be getting around 1K an hour of gaming (not including munchie breaks, smoke breaks, bathroom breaks- we're talking straight game time).

10 skill uses: 250
playing in char:50
daring:50-100
5 minor menace:125-250
endangering own life: 100-300
2 futile ideas: 50
1 useful idea/quick thinking: 100

That adds up to 725-1100. And honestly, most of those are low ends of straight gaming. You'd be surprised how much can get done in 1 solid hour if you stay in char, and focused on game (not constantly taking breaks, not joking and bs'ing, etc).

And that's not "big moments" in the adventure. Those should be netting you even more.
Using some numbers here-

Normal Gaming session: 3 hours (Actually 4, but figure in food, drinks, bathroom, smoking, bs'ing)
Gaming 1/week
52 weeks a year- we'll drop that to 48. People being sick, holidays, family time, etc
That makes 144 hours a year.
Even at the "low end" of above, 725/hour:
104,400 exp

So if your group meets once a week, and gets 3 hours of gaming done each meeting, inside one year they should be looking at level 10-11. And again, that does NOT include the "big" events in each adventure, which should be netting them even more exp. And if your group has longer sessions, then they should be even further ahead.

[TheGameMaster]

In a way it is sort of good that characters don't get really high levels that fast, when they do level up they appriciate it more and feel they have really earned it. That is just my thought though

[The Dark Elf]

Ive been GMing the same characters in one campaign for well over a decade and although they are multiple OCC's the equivalent xp would make them lvl 11-12 at the most!

Back in my HS days (which granted, were a while ago) we averaged about 20 hours of gaming a week. Inside a couple of months we would have chars that had hit 15+.

If you have characters going that long, and are only 11-12, then you might need to seriously look at 2 things- how stingy are you being with the exp, and how much distraction/NON-Gaming are you guys doing?

Seriously, most PCs should be getting around 1K an hour of gaming (not including munchie breaks, smoke breaks, bathroom breaks- we're talking straight game time).

10 skill uses: 250
playing in char:50
daring:50-100
5 minor menace:125-250
endangering own life: 100-300
2 futile ideas: 50
1 useful idea/quick thinking: 100

That adds up to 725-1100. And honestly, most of those are low ends of straight gaming. You'd be surprised how much can get done in 1 solid hour if you stay in char, and focused on game (not constantly taking breaks, not joking and bs'ing, etc).

And that's not "big moments" in the adventure. Those should be netting you even more.
Using some numbers here-

Normal Gaming session: 3 hours (Actually 4, but figure in food, drinks, bathroom, smoking, bs'ing)
Gaming 1/week
52 weeks a year- we'll drop that to 48. People being sick, holidays, family time, etc
That makes 144 hours a year.
Even at the "low end" of above, 725/hour:
104,400 exp

So if your group meets once a week, and gets 3 hours of gaming done each meeting, inside one year they should be looking at level 10-11. And again, that does NOT include the "big" events in each adventure, which should be netting them even more exp. And if your group has longer sessions, then they should be even further ahead.

I think you've misunderstood the post. I mean RL decade. On AND off for over ten years. they average about 800-1000 xp per session (not hour) which includes some "chit chat" and works out to about 250 sessions. I have a good understanding of experience table and use it appropriately for the best dramatic feel and player reward, thanks.

[azazel1024]

Same place. I think the highest any of my characters has ever gotten was level 12.

That was with more vigorous gaming with 10-16hr sessions once a week for most of my senior year of high school. Of course that was about 50/50 with D&D and some Rifts mixed in as well. Very sporadic gaming since high school.

Typically either the character dies before they can reach a higher level (as in no chance of resurection dead), or a character/game gets abondoned and a new one is started up.

I think the longest anyone in my group held on to a character was about a year or a bit more over maybe 40-50 gaming sessions and I think was about level 12 or 13.

The only way I see to get to 15, other than years of using the same character, is to be really flexible with the rules. To me things like "every time you swing your sword and angel gets its wings" is a little liberal. 300-400exp in the course of taking out a minor minion not including the exp you get for actually defeating it seems excessive. Let alone just for talking etc.

However, without bending how much XP stuff is worth, you just can't build levels quickly at higher level. I've been considering a sliding scale for XP for a long time that increases how much XP things like ideas, role playing in character and defeating bad guys/putting life at risk is worth while keeping some things like skill use static. That way at higher levels you at least accumulate XP for some tasks a little faster, though you still have a lot more XP per level that you need to go up.
-Matt

[MrShowtime]

Man, considering some of you have been playing for the better part of 2 decades gives you much more experience than I (Our average being 700-1000exp per session). However, I feel that a few of you give out way more experience than is needed and you make leveling less valuable. I've only been playing PFRPG for about 3 years now with dabbles in D&D and RIFTS but altogether our highest level character has only just reached level 6. and that was a great feat for our group. I like the way exp is worked in our group. Every level is a momentous occasion.

I also find that the excessive exp. a lot of you give seems very munchkin-like to me. I read so much on theses threads about how much everyone hates the people who play that munchkin style. I know that my group tends to lean in that direction much of the time but I think the lowered amount of exp. makes up for it. And by level 15 (let alone level 60) wouldn't a retirement of the character be in order? A fresh start? A new challenge? I know we have gotten bored with characters (hence our ventures into D&D and Rifts) and we're still relatively new to the game. But that's just us.

[Goliath Strongarm]

I also find that the excessive exp. a lot of you give seems very munchkin-like to me. I read so much on theses threads about how much everyone hates the people who play that munchkin style.

Not munchkin. Powerful yes. But then, since the rest of the world become more complicated and powerful as we levelled, it was balanced. High powered games are not necessarily munchkin.

And by level 15 (let alone level 60) wouldn't a retirement of the character be in order? A fresh start? A new challenge?

That depends a LOT on the GM. If he/she can't cope with the increase in level, and make new challenges, then yes you need to retire and start over. But, if you have a good GM, or even better a GREAT GM, then it's not that difficult. As the characters get more powerful, then the villians and challenges get more powerful.

Sure, some people might say "by that level you can monkeystomp anyone in the world". That doesn't work if the rest of the world is slowly increased as well. It doesn't work if the villians are level 60 and have minions to boot. It doesn't work if you're playing world-altering events, taking on Gods, and fighting minions of the Old Ones. It's a matter of keeping the challenges appropriate to the power-level.

[jaymz]

I was in agame where in 10 game sessions I got to 5th level from 1st. half those session didn;t erven include combat but having ti interact with characters and think on our feet as well as use non combat skills. When given our XP i never thoght GM was being over generous or stingy andit actually "felt" like the right amount for the thigns we were accomplishing.

Unfortunately the game ended with little fanfair to various social isues that arose between the GM and his girlfriend who was also a gamer and in the game. Too bad too my Cyberknihgt was a kick ass melee combatant and one he was able to shift the form of his psi weapons to be virtually anythign I was taking ancient WPs so I could get full bonuses no mater what type of weapon I formed

[MrShowtime]

A good or great GM is the best thing for any RPG I must agree... What keeps you interested and not bored with your super high-level characters?

[TheGameMaster]

In a way it is sort of good that characters don't get really high levels that fast, when they do level up they appriciate it more and feel they have really earned it. That is just my thought though

is there realy that much to apreciate? you get 1D6 more HP & its less of a big deal than it woudve been in D&D coz u already have stacks of bonus hit points called SDC. u get a percentage boost on a whole buncha skills u only ocasionaly use. if ur a psychic or spelcaster you get some extra PPE or ISP but virtualy noen of ur powers get better. only good stuffs u get is a few extra combat bonuses from ur h2h and wp skills.

For myself and my gamers leveling up is a big thing. and usually happens 2 or 3 levels at a time, but it takes them a long time to get there so when they do level up they usualy get to pick new skills and such, that is what makes them feel they have earned it and makes it more special. Playing this way the highest level character in our group is no more than lvl 6, and the only reason she is that high is because she had gained a level or 2 in a previous campaign.

There was something else I was going to add but I lost my train of thought maybe I'll think of it later.

[MrShowtime]

One of the things I don't like about being at high levels is the amount of bonuses characters will have. They make the D20 roll mean almost nothing. I like the idea that when you roll an 18 to strike it was on a base roll of say 15 with a mild +3 as opposed to a roll of 6 with a +12.

I also like that skills aren't a near sure thing. It takes away from the game I think.

[JuliusCreed]

One of the things I don't like about being at high levels is the amount of bonuses characters will have. They make the D20 roll mean almost nothing. I like the idea that when you roll an 18 to strike it was on a base roll of say 15 with a mild +3 as opposed to a roll of 6 with a +12.

I also like that skills aren't a near sure thing. It takes away from the game I think.

I can sympathize with that. I'm currently running an campaign involving 3 10th level elves, 1 Warlock (fire/air), 1 Mind Mage and 1 Assassin.. I find the easiest things to do to overcome such difficulties is a> the Tim Allen route for opponents/adversaries (ie "More Power!!!"), b> strength of numbers (100 to one odds can make ANYBODY think twice) and c> Skill penalties (done in a realistic, yet still challenging way, such as the Pick Locks skill encountering a particularly unusual/difficult lock that's -25-30% to pick, or the area you want to prowl through being extremely well lit, wide open and heavilly or even magically guarded). Simply put, the more powerful your players get, the more powerful/challenging you have to make the opponents or situation. Remember... everything the players do, the GM HAS to do better.

[Goliath Strongarm]

Simply put, the more powerful your players get, the more powerful/challenging you have to make the opponents or situation. Remember... everything the players do, the GM HAS to do better.

I prefer the GM CAN do better!

Sure, the players might have +12 to hit.. but so does that Evil Cleric... who also happens to have 100 mindless minions slavering after your flesh... they may not have high bonuses, but enough rolls, SOMEONE is going to get a nat 20 in there...

Or that pesky PC 12th level assassin... yeah well, the leader of the local Skullduggery guild has decided the up and comer is a threat... so now, every 2 bit pickpocket is after him. So you have shadowy enemies ranging from level 1 to level 14 all after you. With skills just as high or higher... and all wanting that 1mil gp purse on his head.

That Wizard of yours that casts level 14 spells left and right, hardly blinking at PPE costs. Well, there's this guy who has decided he wants a copy of your spellbook... and HE can toss around spells of legend without blinking at PPE costs. AND he also knows some summoning, so he has minions chasing the wizard. And he wants the tongue for a circle of power....

You can ALWAYS one up your players. And remember, the goal isn't to squash them, it's to CHALLENGE them. You don't have to go way out there. You just have to go slightly past them. It's enough that it's difficult, but still doable.

[MrShowtime]

Good work guys! As always I leave very satisfied

[Damian Magecraft]

Simply put, the more powerful your players get, the more powerful/challenging you have to make the opponents or situation. Remember... everything the players do, the GM HAS to do better.

I prefer the GM CAN do better!

Sure, the players might have +12 to hit.. but so does that Evil Cleric... who also happens to have 100 mindless minions slavering after your flesh... they may not have high bonuses, but enough rolls, SOMEONE is going to get a nat 20 in there...

Or that pesky PC 12th level assassin... yeah well, the leader of the local Skullduggery guild has decided the up and comer is a threat... so now, every 2 bit pickpocket is after him. So you have shadowy enemies ranging from level 1 to level 14 all after you. With skills just as high or higher... and all wanting that 1mil gp purse on his head.

That Wizard of yours that casts level 14 spells left and right, hardly blinking at PPE costs. Well, there's this guy who has decided he wants a copy of your spellbook... and HE can toss around spells of legend without blinking at PPE costs. AND he also knows some summoning, so he has minions chasing the wizard. And he wants the tongue for a circle of power....

You can ALWAYS one up your players. And remember, the goal isn't to squash them, it's to CHALLENGE them. You don't have to go way out there. You just have to go slightly past them. It's enough that it's difficult, but still doable.

While I agree that this is feasable.
And that it is not beyond the scope of my abilities as a GM.
I find these "bigger than the last" games never last very long.
Also the group quoting Buffy the Vampire Slayer (their favorite being "whats the plural of apocalypse?" and "we gotta save the world from destruction... again?") gets old after a while.

Both myself and my players have more fun in the low and mid range games.

[TheGameMaster]

I was in a game where we were planing an ambush on a small caravan of Orc. There was three of us PCs with 2 or 3 other NPCs helping us, and we were taking on like 20 Orcs. Well our ambush plan worked so well we took out all the Orc with only one NPC dying and us taking minimal damage. To make it more of a challenge our GM made 3 or 4 Ogres in full chainmail pop out of one of the wagons. They managed to beat me unconsious kill another NPC and kick the crap out of our troll and the knight in full plate.

[azazel1024]

I agree. Once games get too high powered they lose their allure eventually. Part of why we tended to roll up new characters once we got up around level 10. The low/mid level games were just more fun.
-Matt

[Goliath Strongarm]

Also the group quoting Buffy the Vampire Slayer (their favorite being "whats the plural of apocalypse?" and "we gotta save the world from destruction... again?") gets old after a while.

I agree. That's why variety is the spice of life. I try to make sure that it's always a different. Not just the "save the world" or "save the town" stuff. Specific goals can keep players busy for a LONG time. And when they get sidetracked is even better.

Remember what the dragon said about the 15th level paladin..

"he was hours and hours of chewy goodness"

[Cinos]

A good or great GM is the best thing for any RPG I must agree... What keeps you interested and not bored with your super high-level characters?

To preface this; I haven't used book listed rules for like anything for like . . . a decade (well, more like 5-7 years, since it's been a slow transition). Due to this, I don't use a straight level system, but like some have adapted a rank or aspect leveling system (Where your skills move independently, and in this case, even things like class abilities can be individually leveled). Had I been using a normal EXP system, my party would have been a good step past 15th by now, likely 18th - 20th. I don't hand out EXP for every stupid skill a player uses, but give EXP for plans, good attempts, Role play, as well as general skill success assuming it was relevant.

Now, onto the bit I quoted. Well so long as you don't keep throwing bandits at the party who sit down and think -which- rune weapon is best suited for this task, and keep the things that still bash in these high level characters and keeps the fear of god in them, it all stays well and good. I've been accused munchkin by a many, here and else where, even with stats that make head spins, my players have only managed to drop one dragon, and made off with one hydra's head. They've almost single handed stopped four sieges through the game (twice by taking command of the soldiers in the army, twice through personal strength of arms making a huge difference for their side). Some of the fights with notable NPC's have come so close to killing a character for simple mistakes on their part. At times it has, one of them has made a conversion into undeath, being a Priest of Utu, more for its durability, being the one resurrecting others, he was a weak link that kept getting targeted.

And through all of this, they've never needed to stop the end of the world, deal with a glaring or needless cliche. Almost all of their acts where self motivated, or a forced choice (i.e one of survival). Heck the trip from 4th (their starting point) to 8th was a fight for survival to deal with their own problems from tangent story lines (prices on head from making a snide comment at Count Lovejoy at Kaash, to doing dirty work for King Kai in Troknar, eventually pardoned for aid during a Western attack on the city).

As to the problem with dice presented by MrShowtime, yes, sadly that's the nature of single dice combat systems focused on bonuses. For this core reason, I completely changed them in my rule-set (bonuses work as a percent modifier, a few things give static +X, so a 10 rolled could be an 16 total for a pro soldier, but his 19 will be around 30ish total, making your roll much more important). Leaves even high powered characters unwilling to engage in dicey fights they're not aware of.

And now I've ranted far longer then I planned, I need to get a post-it note to remind me not to post at 6AM . . .

[Myrrhibis]

Been playing 23 yrs. Highest earned PC was... 14 I think. But it'd been an epic heroic game, and she was one of the starting characters. Most do seem to peter out @ L10.

Then again, nowadays, we only play 4-5hrs (3-4 productive) biweekly. And every few months, we only get 1 or none sessions in. When I started, and was younger, pre-parenthood, we played weekly for 4-7 hrs. Those character would easily have been L15 in a year - I don't think any were stuck with beyond L10, and we'd change-up the game every 6or so months.

I've played a L20 artificially bumped up, for a Hades-set adventure. Was a lot of fun.

But some of y'all are stingy GMs. My core player group, and the regular short-term players over the past 15 yrs would have rioted or left @ the amounts listed. For a decent-sized battle, with good teamwork & attempt at sound tactics - easily 2000-3000 min. While not *every* skill use/action = exp, we usually do a flat exp dump in addition to individual creative/effective skill usage or deeds. Unless it was pretty much a Bull-chatting night, I don't think we ever earned less than 500pts. And this is across a half-dozen GMs.

[pblackcrow]

Our in our games we get 2,500-10,000 exp for a side adventure. A good thief especially can rack up a lot of points in a maze or dungeon or the like for trying to locate traps, detect concealment, and searching for secret doors and hidden compartments and the like. As long as he makes the rolls it doesn't matter if he's successful in finding them or not. Pick locks, detect ambush, literacy, art, etc are all good ones that racks up the points.

[Damian Magecraft]

Our in our games we get 2,500-10,000 exp for a side adventure. A good thief especially can rack up a lot of points in a maze or dungeon or the like for trying to locate traps, detect concealment, and searching for secret doors and hidden compartments and the like. As long as he makes the rolls it doesn't matter if he's successful in finding them or not. Pick locks, detect ambush, literacy, art, etc are all good ones that racks up the points.

10,000? yeesh not even in my younger days in D&D did we ever rack up exp like that for a simple side adventure (unless it took more than 4 sessions to complete).

[pblackcrow]

Our in our games we get 2,500-10,000 exp for a side adventure. A good thief especially can rack up a lot of points in a maze or dungeon or the like for trying to locate traps, detect concealment, and searching for secret doors and hidden compartments and the like. As long as he makes the rolls it doesn't matter if he's successful in finding them or not. Pick locks, detect ambush, literacy, art, etc are all good ones that racks up the points.

10,000? yeesh not even in my younger days in D&D did we ever rack up exp like that for a simple side adventure (unless it took more than 4 sessions to complete).

Uh, no 2-3 sessions usually. And usually it's the thief that racked up the 10,000 points everyone else get 2,500-8,500. For his 60 successful skill rolls. But, one session will last for 8-12 or more hours. Some times we have a gaming sleepover on weekends. Those are an absolute blast!!!

[MrShowtime]

We as a group didn't like the idea of getting exp for non successful skill attempts so we removed that. We only give out exp for successful skill attempts.

And another question... we can't understand how to give exp for each individual thing you fight. It just wasn't working for use in a battle against 20 things. How do you keep track of who you fought and killed and who hit you and who you didn't touch and so on. That was way too much work for us and we scraped that as well and just gave out a good chuck of exp for the battle instead of each pirate or whatever we fought.

[The Dark Elf]

One thing about PF that my group loves is the multiple OCC options (especially first edition). It helps to move your mid ranged character to a higher power level whilst keeping the same campaign but with an alternative character focus.

Keeps it fresh and fun! All our campaign characters have multiple OCC's. One even had four!

[pblackcrow]

We as a group didn't like the idea of getting exp for non successful skill attempts so we removed that. We only give out exp for successful skill attempts.

And another question... we can't understand how to give exp for each individual thing you fight. It just wasn't working for use in a battle against 20 things. How do you keep track of who you fought and killed and who hit you and who you didn't touch and so on. That was way too much work for us and we scraped that as well and just gave out a good chuck of exp for the battle instead of each pirate or whatever we fought.

It's called experience logs...Here is an example of them: http://www.palladium-megaverse.com/cutt ... 28f%29.pdf Though the GM keeps track of them with a similar chart, on a note pad.

[Killer Cyborg]

So if your group meets once a week, and gets 3 hours of gaming done each meeting, inside one year they should be looking at level 10-11. And again, that does NOT include the "big" events in each adventure, which should be netting them even more exp. And if your group has longer sessions, then they should be even further ahead.

Depends entirely on the GM's style, and the players' style.
My group met for 12 hour sessions, once a week, for several years, and nobody got past 7th or 8th level.
One big difference is if you treat a fight with a dozen weaker opponents as 12 minor menaces, or as 1 minor menace.
Another is how often characters die.
Another is whether you hand out xp for every single skill use, or whether you only give it up for important or significant uses.
Another is how clever the players are, and how easily the GM is impressed with something enough to call it clever.

[jaymz]

In my group we came up with a "house-rule":

1.) Every player maintains a index card on which he/she is responsible for redording all dice rolls that they make during a session,
a.) the die rolls are totaled at the end of the session,
b.) the total is added to the character's experience points at the end of the session,
This seems to stimulate role-playing by players, and fairly awards a player for role-playing.

2.) The GM will fowllow the Experience charts as closely as possible,
a.) "By the book" based Experience points are awarded immedately and can cause the player to level up during the course of a game,

3.) Any dispute between two or more parties will be decided by a d100 roll-off, with the winner(s) winning the dispute,
and the loser(s) being individualy awarded both sides combined roll as experience points.
This rule seems to keep disputes to a minimum, yet it also awards players for "sticking to their guns" and gives some insentive for standing up for your position when you believe you are correct or feel that you must.

4.) At the end of the session all players will nominate a M.V.P./Goodsportmanship Player, that player will recive 25% of the average players experience points for that session.
a.) no player can nominate themselves,
b.) all balots will remain secrete,
This rule reinforces goodsportmanship and awards a player that goes the extra mile in the course of a session.

This is just the way we have done it for over 15 years and it has allowed characters to level up rather quickly and fairly. Just MhO.

That really is pretty fair. nice

[GreenGhost]

I've had a character reach 15th level and I still have him, but since I GM I really don't play him anymore. I first wrote him up in 1988.

[X'Zanthar]

We initially many, many years ago, started off using the 1st edition rules, and characters shot up fast. After a bit, our long time GM has modified the rules as the game matured. As most of the older players are doing player drivien email turns. His younger (i.e. kids) players he usually does FtF.

Us old folk got some pretty high level characters, several even, but I would say the highest would be a dual classer with I think 20 levels of XP. Most are/were around 15, though some are spin-offs, like my latest, my dragon, gets partial XP from your main character if you "retire" it. You get an amount of XP, gold, equipment based on your new characters background story, and your old ones retirement story, as that character does not just go poof, it will have an impact on the world and maybe on other characters (needs to be IC and at some point you might get email input). Max XP is usually half for the new character.

That said, the awards from skills and combat give diminishing returns in say one battle, you kill 20 goblins, the 20th gobby will be worth very little. Ideas and IC actions give more and really help RP development. The higher you are it seems the slower going it gets now, but that works out as it is really a big deal when the level number rolls over.

[FreelancerMar]

Although I would not normally do this to my playing group, I have seen this done. Each and every time a Character Reaches the next level, the XP is Reset to Zero. This means that a Character that just hit level 2 has the xp reset to 0 and has to gain 3 levels worth of xp in order to reach lvl 3. This counters the monty hallish earns xp every time the char swings the sword syndrome.

hrmmm Starting 1st lvl char reaches lvl 8-10 upon completeing the "Toumbs fo Grishidi" Adventure eh???? The highest lvl a starting character should be after completeing this adventure should be no more than lvl6 and even then thats pushing it.

[Myrrhibis]

We grind up to about L8-10, a few 11, in any campaign. And it's not uncommon for us to set aside 1 group & create another for a different campaign. upon completion of Camp2, if we don't go back to camp 1, then characters from either can show up in Camp 3 *if* they were at a good break-point in their respective campaign to journey elsewhere.

In short, while the current group I've been playing with for the past 15 yrs in various configs, it is not uncommon for us to re-introduce characters from other campaigns. Likewise, some high-level characters will appear as NPCs/contacts periodically. We use the PB XP list with little tweaking, aside from playing in-character. We are very much a *role* playing group, and the more personality you infuse in your character & thus into the group, doing memorable or creative actions/skill usages - even if it phails spectacularly - is worth a bit of extra XP.

[JMHutchins]

I've been running various Palladium games since I first found the system in its 1st edition incarnation. Leveling up too fast or too much XP has never really been an issue. When I GM, which is most of the time, I feel I am liberal but fair with the experience. I don't give out XP every time someone performs a skill (successful or not), but rather every time they are trying it and the result matters. It's a judgement call on my part but as long as the player isn't obviously abusing the rules and is using the skill for necessary reasons, then I'll issue XP to him or her for it. For example, if a thief is running around outside climbing everything in sight just to get XP, then no. However, if said thief uses climb/scale walls during the course of the adventure for a necessary reason (to scout ahead, to sneak up on something, etc), then the XP will be awarded, successful or not.

I also gave out fight XP based on the fight, not the amount of creatures. If the party faces 20 poorly-armed goblins, they get an XP award for facing a single, minor menace. Now if a dragon was with them, then they would get XP for facing a single, major menace.

In most of my campaigns, players earn the most XP from heroics, playing in-character, creativity, adding to the game world (my catch-all when someone creates something on the side - a village, a cool NPC, or anything I can use later to make my job of creating games any easier), and participation (interactions with each other and NPCs). We've never had any PC exceed level 8 but we've also rarely played a single campaign consistently for more than two years. With my system, players reach 3rd or 4th level fairly quickly then kind of plateau. Their next few levels come slower and slower as they focus more on tellign stories and having fun in-character than trying to kill everything they meet and running from adventure to adventure. In fact, the game that earned them the most XP had only a single fight in it, and that was against a group of mercenaries a town official hired to kill the party after they made him look bad before his peers. It had a lot of courtly intrigue, swashbuckling chases, and plenty of witty dialogue but the fighting was scarce. None of the players remember it that way, however. Ask any of them and they'll describe an endless romp of constant action. Not all action is fighting, however. Nothing better than a good foot chase!

[Witchcraft]

I've been experimenting with a video-game based approach to XP earning / distribution. In Betrayal at Krondor or Skyrim or even Dragon Age you are usually awarded XP from completing missions and quests, you earn XP (in the respective skill) by blacksmithing, sneaking, hacking and slashing and blocking, picking locks, making potions, etc. As you level up it takes increasingly more XP to level up each facet and, in turn, your overall level. I find that this progressive skill-based advancement rewards you for thinking outside the box, embracing RP and story, and gradually increases the leveling curve organically instead of arbitrarily / artificially using an XP chart in the book.

[DiceCollector]

Our in our games we get 2,500-10,000 exp for a side adventure. A good thief especially can rack up a lot of points in a maze or dungeon or the like for trying to locate traps, detect concealment, and searching for secret doors and hidden compartments and the like. As long as he makes the rolls it doesn't matter if he's successful in finding them or not. Pick locks, detect ambush, literacy, art, etc are all good ones that racks up the points.

10,000? yeesh not even in my younger days in D&D did we ever rack up exp like that for a simple side adventure (unless it took more than 4 sessions to complete).

Uh, no 2-3 sessions usually. And usually it's the thief that racked up the 10,000 points everyone else get 2,500-8,500. For his 60 successful skill rolls. But, one session will last for 8-12 or more hours. Some times we have a gaming sleepover on weekends. Those are an absolute blast!!!

You get the EXP on ALL skill rolls not just successful ones

[Damian Magecraft]

You get the EXP on ALL skill rolls not just successful ones

Yes according to the rules, but GM's can change that to avoid abuse of the rules. I know that I like this idea of only giving experience for skill rolls when it actually means something and not just using it for the experience gain.

You would be better served then just awarding it for critical rolls; when the outcome is uncertain or could have long term repercussions on the story line.

That is the only time I require the players to make a skill check; all other skill uses are treated as general use and succeed without requiring a roll.

For example: Joe says his character is driving to the local McDs for a combo meal.
Do you make a player roll the dice to:
Start the car?
Put the car in the proper gear?
Pull out of the garage?
Merge into traffic?
Navigate from HQ to the Store?
Pull into the drive thru lane of the store?
place his order at the speaker box?
pull up to the window?
count his money?
count his change?
pull out of the drive thru lane?
merge into traffic?
Navigate from the store to HQ?
Pull into the garage?
park the car?
place the car into parking Gear?
etc...

or do you just say it is a routine use of the skills and let it happen?

[Myrrhibis]

You get the EXP on ALL skill rolls not just successful ones

Yes according to the rules, but GM's can change that to avoid abuse of the rules. I know that I like this idea of only giving experience for skill rolls when it actually means something and not just using it for the experience gain.

You would be better served then just awarding it for critical rolls; when the outcome is uncertain or could have long term repercussions on the story line.

That is the only time I require the players to make a skill check; all other skill uses are treated as general use and succeed without requiring a roll.

For example: Joe says his character is driving to the local McDs for a combo meal.
Do you make a player roll the dice to:
Start the car?
Put the car in the proper gear?
Pull out of the garage?
Merge into traffic?
Navigate from HQ to the Store?
Pull into the drive thru lane of the store?
place his order at the speaker box?
pull up to the window?
count his money?
count his change?
pull out of the drive thru lane?
merge into traffic?
Navigate from the store to HQ?
Pull into the garage?
park the car?
place the car into parking Gear?
etc...

or do you just say it is a routine use of the skills and let it happen?

If there were no real hazards between the two points, I'd just let it happen. But for most of it - 1 roll would suffice.

Our group does rolls for most things - but we do tend to combine multiple actions/effects into 1 roll, unless trying something very intricate. And the skill has to be applicable, rolling for the sake of rolling won't gain any XP. (Like rolling seduction when you aren't playing a ho-character, or seducing isn't necessary to get close to a mark).