Clovenhoof
Mongoose
Concerning XP-time, I do the same as SnowDog, and hand out XP at the end of sessions. I also try to end sessions on a break, like setting up camp for the night. If someone (or all) make a level, they can take it between game sessions.
I understand the general thought that your actual playing experience should be reflected by the class choice. But I find that it limits the player too much if you pull it through so strictly. What if the party has to dig through heaps of scrolls in a library, say, to find a way to vanquish a demon? Do you force a Scholar level on them?
And on the other hand, how can a non-thief character _ever_ choose to take a Thief level? After all, he cannot pick locks and disarm traps and do all those thievy things.
I am also not a fan of having very long intervals between adventures. Like "the next three months" or "the rest of the year".
So, let's try to resolve this by defining possible solutions. Let's differentiate between advancing and acquiring classes:
- if the character spent at least some time in the wilderness, that should qualify to advance any existing wilderness class (Bar/Bor/Nom).
- if there was any considerable amount of fighting (and there usually is), any fighter-type class can be advanced.
- analogous for other typical class activities. Even landlocked Pirates can advance their class simply by sticking to their combat style.
- even if pressed into service in an army, a Thief will still remain a Thief in his heart (same for Barbarian etc.). Maybe he can pursue his line by volunteering for scout tasks, or forage for food (tracking and hunting), and stuff like that.
- All in all, I would very, very rarely deny an advance in an existing class. It has never happened in any of my games in the past.
- acquiring a new class is more tricky. Ideally you should have a trainer. If there is a thief in the party, he can teach his fellows the basics of thieving. Or the other way round, if the thief wants to hone his combat ability, any fighter-type (full BAB) teacher will do.
- some classes are easier to acquire than others. You can almost always take a Soldier level, if you get either combat training or simply fight enough battles (again, usually you do). You trainer doesn't even have to be a Soldier. However, the Pirate class should only be acquired after some time spent on a ship.
It is an element of D20 games that characters receive new abilities "out of the blue", without anyone teaching them how to do it. You can take any feat whose prereqs you fulfill, and then you simply know how to do it. Nobody needs to show you, you just get better over time.
Introducing such limitations may follow a logical approach and be realistic -- but hell, this is a fantasy game, there's something called Suspension of Disbelief, and not everything needs to be completely logical and realistic.
To make a long story short, D20 is a game, not a simulation. If I wanted to play a simulation, I'd chose Harnmaster or Rulemonster or something like that.
In that sense, I included the GM with the players, since all of you play the game together. There are different playing styles and there is no "right" or "wrong" playing style. There's just time spent well or wasted, and if all the players (inc. GM) are having a good time, all is great.
I understand the general thought that your actual playing experience should be reflected by the class choice. But I find that it limits the player too much if you pull it through so strictly. What if the party has to dig through heaps of scrolls in a library, say, to find a way to vanquish a demon? Do you force a Scholar level on them?
And on the other hand, how can a non-thief character _ever_ choose to take a Thief level? After all, he cannot pick locks and disarm traps and do all those thievy things.
I am also not a fan of having very long intervals between adventures. Like "the next three months" or "the rest of the year".
So, let's try to resolve this by defining possible solutions. Let's differentiate between advancing and acquiring classes:
- if the character spent at least some time in the wilderness, that should qualify to advance any existing wilderness class (Bar/Bor/Nom).
- if there was any considerable amount of fighting (and there usually is), any fighter-type class can be advanced.
- analogous for other typical class activities. Even landlocked Pirates can advance their class simply by sticking to their combat style.
- even if pressed into service in an army, a Thief will still remain a Thief in his heart (same for Barbarian etc.). Maybe he can pursue his line by volunteering for scout tasks, or forage for food (tracking and hunting), and stuff like that.
- All in all, I would very, very rarely deny an advance in an existing class. It has never happened in any of my games in the past.
- acquiring a new class is more tricky. Ideally you should have a trainer. If there is a thief in the party, he can teach his fellows the basics of thieving. Or the other way round, if the thief wants to hone his combat ability, any fighter-type (full BAB) teacher will do.
- some classes are easier to acquire than others. You can almost always take a Soldier level, if you get either combat training or simply fight enough battles (again, usually you do). You trainer doesn't even have to be a Soldier. However, the Pirate class should only be acquired after some time spent on a ship.
It is an element of D20 games that characters receive new abilities "out of the blue", without anyone teaching them how to do it. You can take any feat whose prereqs you fulfill, and then you simply know how to do it. Nobody needs to show you, you just get better over time.
Introducing such limitations may follow a logical approach and be realistic -- but hell, this is a fantasy game, there's something called Suspension of Disbelief, and not everything needs to be completely logical and realistic.
To make a long story short, D20 is a game, not a simulation. If I wanted to play a simulation, I'd chose Harnmaster or Rulemonster or something like that.
I will only add "as long as the players and the GM are happy with it."
In that sense, I included the GM with the players, since all of you play the game together. There are different playing styles and there is no "right" or "wrong" playing style. There's just time spent well or wasted, and if all the players (inc. GM) are having a good time, all is great.