What would be the safest, not-cheesy way to level grind in a sand-box like setting?

[Samael Morgenst]

Thought experiment not meant to be used in a real session.

Suppose you had to make your character grow in experience, levels and - possibly - wealth and power, while minimizing risks as much as possible.

The setting is a procedurally generated sandbox-like world (think about Dwarf Fortress) very similar or identical to core Dungeons and Dragons edition 3.5.

One of the assumption is to avoid blatant cheese, which is subjective, but I trust into the users common sense.

The idea is to use tactics that a character living in that world (a character, not a player) would be able to conceptualize and enact.

For example, a character could plausibly use the Craft or Profession skill for many months, or even some years, to earn money and equip himself better than a standard level 1 character. He could think about raising and training war dogs (which are fairly strong at low levels) to help him in hunting bandits, goblins, or wild boars.

He would NOT think about doing the Thought Bottle / Lycantrophy tricks. Unless he's an high level spellcaster (or mabye a middle level Bard) he would not even know what a Thought Bottle is.

He MAY think about using the Sacrifice / Liquid Pain / soul harvesting methods listed in the Book of the Vile Darkness, if he's Evil aligned and fairly knowledgeable (most evil clerics and fiend worshipper probably does so to a certain extent).


To level grind in relative safety, the first factor is - obviously - to take into account the Challenge Rating of the encounter.
But there is another factor as much important or even more, and is the encounter *predictability*.

Let me make an example. The average wild boar is a CR 2. He's quite strong, but it's a straightforward opponent. He's not stupid but, beside attacking in an impredictable way, there isn't much tactic in his behavior. There aren't many variables.

A goblin is instead, on average , a CR 1/3. It means it takes five or six goblins to match a boar , in a direct fight.
Yet hunting goblins is significantly more dangerous and unpredictable than hunting boars.
Goblins have human-like intelligence. Actually, somewhat below human average, but still sapient.

Therefore:

1. An animal specimen can be larger and stronger (more Hit Dice, larger size), but beside being stronger, it's the same encounter. He'll fight the same way. Intelligent beings instead can have class levels, and vary not only in raw power but also in the kind of danger they pose.

An advanced boar is just a larger, stronger boar. An advanced goblin may be a furtive Rogue, a fierce Barbarian or a crafty Sorcerer.

2. Also, you can immediately notice if an animal specimen is stronger than average: he's larger and looks meaner. A goblin (or orc, or hobgoblin, or koblold) with class levels can look exactly the same as anyone else.

3. Animals are either loners or cooperate only with their same specie (like wolves or lions packs). A goblin can belong to a tribe including orcs or ogres, or he way ride a worg.

4. Animals can be smart in their own way, but they have more or less predictable behavioral patterns. Sapient beings are inherently unpredictable (to a certain extent).


For these reason, personally I would heavily rely on hunting. It's relatively predictable and, in most territories, more or less legal too.

---


Anyhow, how would you proceed? Any idea or insight would be welcome.

[Tohron]

The problem is, it's a bit up to DM interpretation which things actually give XP. For instance, does a character get XP for scrying an area with monsters, teleporting summons over to the location, then watching them kill the monsters? If not, does having a way to remotely give them orders change that?

For lower-level tactics, does a character get full XP for setting up a remote-activated, high damage mechanical trap with bait, then activating it from a hidden location? A level 3 Artificer can make an at-will Arcane Eye item, so they wouldn't even need line-of-sight at that point.

[Samael Morgenst]

It's a sandbox autonomous world without DM.

Experience Points are assigned by an artificial-intelligence-like algorhytms following guidelines as closely resembling those of core d&d 3.5 as possible.

The problem is, it's a bit up to DM interpretation which things actually give XP. For instance, does a character get XP for scrying an area with monsters, teleporting summons over to the location, then watching them kill the monsters? If not, does having a way to remotely give them orders change that?

For lower-level tactics, does a character get full XP for setting up a remote-activated, high damage mechanical trap with bait, then activating it from a hidden location? A level 3 Artificer can make an at-will Arcane Eye item, so they wouldn't even need line-of-sight at that point.

Let's say that is up to your (the user's writing) perception of what constitutes "cheese".

Personally, I would prefer that the character was at least present during the hunt / battle, even if not necessarily involved in first person.

Even better, using traps / summons / trained animals to weaken the kill, but take it down himself.

[RNightstalker]

The closest thing to "cheese" and having predictable outcomes is to consistently go against lower CR creatures. An 8th level character still gets 200 experience points for a CR1 encounter. Grind that out 45 times and that character is now 9th level. That now 9th level character can now go after a CR2 encounter only 40 times to become 10th level, and after that 40 encounters for a CR 7 levels below character level will net the character a new level.

[Tohron]

Another somewhat-cheesy method for finding opponents to fight is making auto-resetting Summon Monster traps designed to created universally-hostile summons. A SMII trap has a base craft cost of 3,000 gp, a SMV trap for 22,500 gp, or a SMIX trap for 76,500 gp. Combine with a Cure Light Wounds trap to heal between fights, and one could accumulate XP rather quickly.

For a less artificial source of regular opponents, a higher-level individual could scry for a layer of the Abyss where the denizens are not too smart, then equip themselves specifically for those enemies and draw them in to a prepared killing field (Fabricate and bags of holding can do a lot, if you have Craft(trapsmithing)). At lower levels, finding an area with lots of dumb monsters and getting their attention to draw them into a prepared killing field could also work well, though you'd need to be more wary of stronger (or flying/burrowing) monsters getting past your traps.

[Maat Mons]

There's nothing in particular saying a fight need to be "to the death" to grant xp. Just fight some other people with the understanding that you're not going to kill each other. This is how people get better at fighting in real life.

[Quertus]

Step 1 - find someone smarter & more knowledgeable (ie, higher level) than me to talk to.

Such a person exists?

Step 2 - take what they tell me (thought bottles, contracting lycanthropy, whatever) under advisement.

Such a person does not exist?

Step 2b - contemplate the nature of the world, how it was apparently procedural-generated with nothing but scrubs, break 4th wall.

Does breaking the 4th wall allow me to ascend to godhood? Yes?

Step 3 - am now a deity, mission successful.

No?

Step 3b - use broken 4th wall to take better ideas (thought bottles, contracting lycanthropy, whatever) under advisement.

So, looks like, in character, we'll be a deity, or we'll have these better ideas to use. Now that that's settled, what do we do?

Craft for money, breed toads (or overcome non-damaging traps) for XP? Breed and sacrifice goblins for Dark Craft funds / Dark Craft XP, and regular XP?

Level a couple times, get the Necropolitan template, spend a few million years crafting and sacrificing until you've maxed out your bling?

Then fight some non-sentient undead (simple zombies, probably) to gain levels, until they're no longer worth XP?

Then fight some larger zombies, until they're no longer worth XP?

Repeat with mindless foes who cannot out-think you and cannot out-run / catch you, until you run out of opportunities to guarantee not-death.

Part of the problem is ensuring that you encounter the things you want to fight, and only encounter those things. Thus, XP farms of breeding toads, or of non-damaging traps, are optimal. Really, you want something more like "sentient mushrooms" or "sentient snails" rather than goblins to sacrifice - something that has no way of ever harming you.

Also, you really want someone higher level creating and facilitating and administering all this, to keep things running smoothly. They can be in charge of creating the harmless sentient sacrifice race, finding or creating lycanthropes, whatever.

Because, in character, realistically? If all you've got is you, who knows what's out in the scary woods (or other nearby terrain feature) that might kill you? At level 1, realistic random encounters should prove quite fatal in most randomly-generated areas. So if there's no one knowledgeable (high level) to ask, the safest things to kill are your fellow villagers and yourself.

[Unoriginal]

If this world is as close to 3.5 as possible, then the answer is simple:

Step 1: Find a portal to Ysgard

Step 2: adventure in Ysgard to your heart's content, knowing that if you die there you just come back in the morning with no inconvenient.


You may require investing points in Knowledge (The Planes) in order to know that's how Ysgard work, and to know where to find a portal, but once this is done it's smooth sailing.

[Crake]

XP is gained for overcoming challenges, not killing things.

Just like in the real world, the best way to level up in dnd, is set yourself a realistic, but challenging goal, and achieve it. Then set the next one, and achieve that, and so on. That's literally all it takes, but most people are satisfied with the status quo, which is why most people are level 1 commoners.

[Quertus]

XP is gained for overcoming challenges, not killing things.

Just like in the real world, the best way to level up in dnd, is set yourself a realistic, but challenging goal, and achieve it. Then set the next one, and achieve that, and so on. That's literally all it takes, but most people are satisfied with the status quo, which is why most people are level 1 commoners.

Eh, as long as we're splitting linguistic hairs, "overcoming challenges" and "achieving goals" aren't exactly synonyms, either. Even most goalless couch potatoes overcome challenges, sometimes on the daily. So, yes, re-framing things as "challenges" is, indeed, the easiest way to gain levels safely in nearly any scenario.

[yeetusmcgeetus]

Trolls. An adventurer would probably know that trolls regenerate, and specifically that cutting a troll in half makes two trolls. Cut a troll in half, wait for it to regrow into two, then kill and burn 1 of them for xp. Repeat. Only works until your ECL gets high enough for trolls to stop giving XP, but it's certainly a nice boost. Also definitely could be conceptualized, assuming the character knows both how trolls work and how XP works. The first is reasonable, and the second is implied by the question.

You may get XP just for cutting the troll in half, as that does knock it out and "defeat" it, but burning one of them makes it absolutely certain

[Samael Morgenst]

XP is gained for overcoming challenges, not killing things.

Then why when you kill someone you feel that sudden surge of elation and sense of power?

Just like in the real world, the best way to level up in dnd, is set yourself a realistic, but challenging goal, and achieve it. Then set the next one, and achieve that, and so on. That's literally all it takes, but most people are satisfied with the status quo, which is why most people are level 1 commoners.

I read something like "most people never go beyond the 2nd or 3rd level in their lives". I think that most people are indeed level 1 commoner in a standard medieval-like setting because they are young, and the average lifespan is limited. Opportunities for learning were limited too, albeit commoners developed indeed many pratical skills.

Most humans would probably be level 2 when and if they reach the age of 35 to 40, and level 3 by their old age.

[Crake]

Eh, as long as we're splitting linguistic hairs, "overcoming challenges" and "achieving goals" aren't exactly synonyms, either. Even most goalless couch potatoes overcome challenges, sometimes on the daily. So, yes, re-framing things as "challenges" is, indeed, the easiest way to gain levels safely in nearly any scenario.

Hence why I included the adjective "challenging" before the noun "goal". You make it a challenging goal, then it would necessitate overcoming challenges as being a part of the achieveing of goals.

Also, it's the DM that determines whether something was in fact a challenge, not the player or character. Just because you wanna say "getting off the couch was challenging", doesn't actually make it so.

Then why when you kill someone you feel that sudden surge of elation and sense of power?

You would only feel that when the killing was a part of overcoming some sort of challenge, just as you would equally feel it when overcoming any challenge, killing or not. The DMG explicitly states that sneaking past a minotaur guarding treasure is worth equally as much xp as killing said minotaur. "Getting the treasure" was the goal of challenge, not "killing the minotaur".

[Samael Morgenst]

Quote Originally Posted by Samael Morgenst View Post
Then why when you kill someone you feel that sudden surge of elation and sense of power?
You would only feel that when the killing was a part of overcoming some sort of challenge, just as you would equally feel it when overcoming any challenge, killing or not. The DMG explicitly states that sneaking past a minotaur guarding treasure is worth equally as much xp as killing said minotaur. "Getting the treasure" was the goal of challenge, not "killing the minotaur".

It was meant to be a creepy joke


Seriously speaking...

I meant something that could at least approach a credible tale.

For example. This is the "basic background" I came up with.

Character is a Commoner untill he reaches the age of reason/adulthood (let's say 15). Then he does his five years of training and becomes a Fighter.

The Player's Handbook says at page 37:

Fighters come to their profession in many ways. Most have had formal training in a noble’s army or at least in the local militia. Some have trained in formal academies. Others are self-taught—unpolished but well tested. A fighter may have taken up the sword as a way to escape the limits of life on the farm, or he may be following a proud family tradition

More or less, mabye along with Rogue, the Fighter is the class more accessible to a not predestinated, common person hailing from an humble background (aka the majority of people).
So that commoner enrolls in the local militia and spends all his free time training relentlessly to raise above his humble station.

I would say he might spend some years saving each coin he can (living in a makeshift shelter, hunting and foraging for sustenance; 1 rank in Wilderness Lore, even as cross class ability, is enough if the terrain is good) and doing some Profession or Craft work. For plausiblity, I would go for Craft - trapmaking and/or Profession - hunter.

So he trades in fur and game, saves money - 7 or 8 gp per week according to core skill rules, minus 3 gp/month for basic sustenance, it makes more or less 300 gp per year. If he has enough skillpoints he can even craft himself some masterwork equipment (4 ranks, take 10, masterwork tools, a semiskilled assistant, a good Int score, and you can reasonably reach the DC 20 at level 1) to save money; else he can buy it.

Uses the Handle Animal skills, raises a small pack of bloodhounds (riding dogs), mabye even War Dogs if he can reach the DC (with a skill focus feat), and with an investment of time of a couple years he can be assisted by four sturdy CR 2 companions.


At this point he can legally and more or less safely "level grind" hunting animals. With masterwork equipment and 4 war dogs, it's a manageable risk. He starts with foxes, weasles, badgers and deers (Challenge Rating 1/4), then the slightly more challenging muflons and wild goats (CR 1/2), followed by lynxes and wolves (CR 1), and finally - once experienced enough - the big game: black bears and wild boars (CR 2).

So the progression is, more or less:

1. small game (CR 1/8) -> level 3
2. foxes, weasles, badgers, deers (CR 1/4) -> level 5
3. muflons, wild goats (CR 1/2) -> level 7
3. lynxes, wolves (CR 1) -> level 9
4. wild boars, black bears (CR 2) -> level 10


---

Now, what I've described is a progression/story that attempts to remain into pseudo-realistic limits and avoid cheese. The fauna / game I've listed is what can plausibly found more or less in any simil-european environment - I tried to not rely on implausible circumstances.

To level grind further is difficult but... well, that's why I'm open to ideas.

[Crake]

It was meant to be a creepy joke


Seriously speaking...

I meant something that could at least approach a credible tale.

For example. This is the "basic background" I came up with.

Character is a Commoner untill he reaches the age of reason/adulthood (let's say 15). Then he does his five years of training and becomes a Fighter.

The Player's Handbook says at page 37:



More or less, mabye along with Rogue, the Fighter is the class more accessible to a not predestinated, common person hailing from an humble background (aka the majority of people).
So that commoner enrolls in the local militia and spends all his free time training relentlessly to raise above his humble station.

I would say he might spend some years saving each coin he can (living in a makeshift shelter, hunting and foraging for sustenance; 1 rank in Wilderness Lore, even as cross class ability, is enough if the terrain is good) and doing some Profession or Craft work. For plausiblity, I would go for Craft - trapmaking and/or Profession - hunter.

So he trades in fur and game, saves money - 7 or 8 gp per week according to core skill rules, minus 3 gp/month for basic sustenance, it makes more or less 300 gp per year. If he has enough skillpoints he can even craft himself some masterwork equipment (4 ranks, take 10, masterwork tools, a semiskilled assistant, a good Int score, and you can reasonably reach the DC 20 at level 1) to save money; else he can buy it.

Uses the Handle Animal skills, raises a small pack of bloodhounds (riding dogs), mabye even War Dogs if he can reach the DC (with a skill focus feat), and with an investment of time of a couple years he can be assisted by four sturdy CR 2 companions.


At this point he can legally and more or less safely "level grind" hunting animals. With masterwork equipment and 4 war dogs, it's a manageable risk. He starts with foxes, weasles, badgers and deers (Challenge Rating 1/4), then the slightly more challenging muflons and wild goats (CR 1/2), followed by lynxes and wolves (CR 1), and finally - once experienced enough - the big game: black bears and wild boars (CR 2).

So the progression is, more or less:

1. small game (CR 1/8) -> level 3
2. foxes, weasles, badgers, deers (CR 1/4) -> level 5
3. muflons, wild goats (CR 1/2) -> level 7
3. lynxes, wolves (CR 1) -> level 9
4. wild boars, black bears (CR 2) -> level 10


---

Now, what I've described is a progression/story that attempts to remain into pseudo-realistic limits and avoid cheese. The fauna / game I've listed is what can plausibly found more or less in any simil-european environment - I tried to not rely on implausible circumstances.

To level grind further is difficult but... well, that's why I'm open to ideas.

This is just gamifying the world and taking away from it's verisimilitude.

Hunting for the sake of hunting also isn't overcoming a challenge, especially if you're killing routine creatures like that. It's more appropriate to represent it as a profession or survival check.

Put it this way: rats are CR1/8th, by your logic every rat catcher would be level 3 in about a week. But they aren't. Because rat catching is just a profession check, its not an encounter, and it's not overcoming a challenging goal.

[Beni-Kujaku]

Trolls. An adventurer would probably know that trolls regenerate, and specifically that cutting a troll in half makes two trolls. Cut a troll in half, wait for it to regrow into two, then kill and burn 1 of them for xp. Repeat. Only works until your ECL gets high enough for trolls to stop giving XP, but it's certainly a nice boost. Also definitely could be conceptualized, assuming the character knows both how trolls work and how XP works. The first is reasonable, and the second is implied by the question.

You may get XP just for cutting the troll in half, as that does knock it out and "defeat" it, but burning one of them makes it absolutely certain

Sorry, that's not how trolls work in D&D. Only the largest still living bit regenerates. The rest of the body still lives for a while, but all it does is try to rejoin with the main body and dies in a day if it cannot. From the 2e Monstrous Manual : "If a troll is dismembered and scattered, the largest surviving piece regenerates. The others die within one day if they cannot rejoin that piece.". It would be pretty weird to have trolls undergoing mitosis in a world where souls exist. Where would the other soul come from?

[Samael Morgenst]

This is just gamifying the world and taking away from it's verisimilitude.

I don't understand. Isn't to gamify the world precisely what roleplay games are about?Take into account english is not my native language. If you please can explain that point.

Hunting for the sake of hunting also isn't overcoming a challenge, especially if you're killing routine creatures like that. It's more appropriate to represent it as a profession or survival check.

Put it this way: rats are CR1/8th, by your logic every rat catcher would be level 3 in about a week. But they aren't. Because rat catching is just a profession check, its not an encounter, and it's not overcoming a challenging goal.

Hunting for sustenance and gain (to trade in pelts and furs) is challenging indeed. Hunting lynxes or foxes is more challenging than hunting small game, and hunting boars is even more difficult.


About rats. If we are talking about mices or ordinary pests , yes.
If we are talking about 20 cm rats that can take off a pinky with a bite and are so aggressive that attack cats (they exist) then I find appropriate for a rat catcher to be level 2 or 3 if he's experienced.

If they are the rats of Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance (the PS2 game), well...

[Crake]

I don't understand. Isn't to gamify the world precisely what roleplay games are about?Take into account english is not my native language. If you please can explain that point.

No, we usually are seeking to simulate a world. The game rules are used to simplify that simulation process, because we aren't gods capable of simulating worlds down to the last atom, so we reduce things down to a game system that is easily understandable and playable.

With the exception of the isekai genre, where characters are aware of the "game mechanics" of the world they're in, most people don't want to include the discreet nature of "levels", or encounters granting specific xp values needed to atain said levels as actual diagetic experiences of characters in their setting.

[RNightstalker]

Hunting for sustenance and gain (to trade in pelts and furs) is challenging indeed. Hunting lynxes or foxes is more challenging than hunting small game, and hunting boars is even more difficult.

If they are the rats of Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance (the PS2 game), well...

Hunting isn't an encounter, it's a survival skill check. But that being said, Dark Alliance does not get the love it deserves.

[Crake]

Hunting isn't an encounter, it's a survival skill check.

Or a profession check, if you're seeking to make money off the venture. In any case, agreed, not xp worthy.

Now, of course, you might run into encounters in the woods, where a creature might be looking to hunt YOU, and THAT might give you some xp (challenge unlocked: don't let the wolves/bear/mountain lion eat you), but simply the act of going out and hunting would not.

[Samael Morgenst]

I didn't wrote or imply that the character (not the player) is fully conscious of the rule mechanics or the Experience Points concept, but it is reasonable to assume that almost any character is able understand training, practice, experimentation and improving through direct experience.

Hunting as a test of prowess , beside that as a means for sustenance, was done by more or less all cultures with a martial streak. Deliberately hunting boars, specifically, and doing so during mating season when they are more aggressive to bot, also has historical precedents.

[Gnaeus]

No, we usually are seeking to simulate a world. The game rules are used to simplify that simulation process, because we aren't gods capable of simulating worlds down to the last atom, so we reduce things down to a game system that is easily understandable and playable.

With the exception of the isekai genre, where characters are aware of the "game mechanics" of the world they're in, most people don't want to include the discreet nature of "levels", or encounters granting specific xp values needed to atain said levels as actual diagetic experiences of characters in their setting.

Splitting hairs. I think that would be the LitRPG genre. Isekai tends to refer to the mechanic in which you die and reincarnate or are otherwise transfered into another (usually fantasy) world. There is overlap. Isekai may or may not have levels, exp, etc.

Whether we are seeking to simulate or gamify a world is less of a distinction than a spectrum. Personally, I'm not fond of starfinder's ship system (in which your party's ship is based on character level) or 5e's NPC system (they don't play by the same rules as PCs) because to me, they are overly gamist. But I wouldn't have any issue with a player saying "you get stronger by overcoming challenging monsters, but the challenge must be meaningful" or "a wand of cure moderate wounds costs 4500gp because it is a spell of the second level of complexity." Even, with appropriate knowledge "the sleep spell is effective against basic monsters, but fails at about the same level of power at which clerics and wizards get spells of the third level of complexity, or at which a fighter is no longer debilitated by dragonfear". I would not expect a typical PC to say "YES, thats 35 exp!" But I would expect that an artificer might have a pretty good idea how much life energy he needs to make that next wand of CLW and possibly even units of measurement for that, so they can know how much to charge, or pay for someone else providing said lifeforce. I don't see any reason why something like a wizard school that has had tens of thousands of graduates for centuries wouldn't be able to tell you exactly which spells were appropriate for a caster of what levels, or even have level stand-ins, like "you have to know and cast 2 spells of this grade to be an initiate of the third order, which gets you a second stripe on your robe and lets you eat at the dining hall in the tower of mysteries."

In Eberron, or XCrawl, I would expect you could get a book describing the order in which classes get abilities, as those are industrialized magitech societies, and in XCrawl in particular I would expect particular in character knowledge about power levels, because you can't get into amateur level crawls if you demonstrate the following powers, and there is absolutely an NPC nerd glued to his screen with a spreadsheet calculating your character's hits against a hobgoblin in chainmail like a football fan charting yards thrown or interceptions, and he is dead on ready to say "ACTUALLY, a typical rank 2 sorcerer will know 2 spells of the first order and be able to cast 5 times in a crawl!" It would be more reality breaking if he couldn't do that.

[Quertus]

So, let’s take a step back, and look at the factors we’re considering:

Level / XP

Wealth

Safety

Cheese / challenge / ability to function under different interpretations

Legality

Likelihood of success

Likelihood of complications

Repeatability

Limited knowledge

“In character”

Anything missing from that list?

Now, let me start with that last one.

In character, Limited knowledge

This one’s rather odd. If I tell my 0-level 5-year-old advisor about Thought Bottles and Lycanthropes, then it’s in character for them to know about such things. And some classes (like Wizard) involve extensive training under some usually quite knowledgeable people. So artificial knowledge limits are just that: artificial. Unless we’re playing Adam and Eve (dibs on… eh, never mind) or something similar, I’m gonna just ignore the artificial knowledge limits.

In character, gain levels / XP

Here’s where we actually start having problems. Find yourself a 5-year-old advisor who’s never heard of D&D or video games or levels, and ask them how one might hone their craft. If one is a Ranger / woodsman type, then hunting for furry animals to eat and skin might well be an answer your get. But a Wizard? Read books, study, maybe even invent spells or craft magic items. Cleric? Pray. Pray lots. Maybe give sermons, or tend to the sick. (Good luck explaining an evil priest to a 5-year-old… outside… never mind).

Point is, unless the world is a lot more “genre savvy” than most, you’re not going to be able to level, in character, in most classes - and, in fact, may well *lose* XP attempting to hone your craft.

Gain XP, Challenge (and RP)

If I take the flaw… name… uh… the one that says you need to make a DC 15 Will save to harm animals… suddenly, it’s a lot harder and more challenging to kill animals. So, by Challenge logic, setting the goal of “kill animals” is a challenging goal for the character, and they’ve got to overcome the challenge of “I don’t like killing animals” in addition to the actual challenge involved in killing the animal, so they would earn *more* XP for killing animals than the average hunter - significantly more for low CR threats like bats 🦇 or foxes 🦊. And this is especially important if the world is more Simulationist than Gamist, if the local wildlife is finite rather than simply being random encounters and/or challenges with set DCs to locate specific types of wildlife (more XP!).

Yet, in character, one would expect someone who loved animals so much they couldn’t bring themselves to harm them to, you know, maybe *not* be out killing them?

Repeatability

I mentioned this up above, but “are creatures finite?” is an important question for this challenge. It’s why people talk about “toad farms” rather than just random encounters at toad and fish lake in this kind of scenario.

And, unless the world is *super* genre-savvy, in character, one wouldn’t expect… oh, wait, people are idiots. Yeah, it could go either way as to whether, in character, a character would even consider stripping / wiping out the local wildlife.

This is getting long; I’ll stop here for now.

[Vahnavoi]

It's been a while since I did an equivalent thought exercise, but one of the better ways is to get to high enough level by fighting lower-CR enemies, then build a CR2 resetting magical trap. Right combination of character traits and trap (for example, resist energy spell versus burning hands trap) allows the trap to be repeated daily as a challenge of its own some number of times. This can be used (with NPC adept to cast the requisite spell) to get a new Level 1 character up to level 7 or 8 in three or four months, I've forgotten the exact formula.

The hardest part is getting to the position to make the trap, since a brand new Level 1 character 1) has no ability to guarantee sufficient numbers of lower-CR enemies and 2) no ability to guarantee access to the right materials. A sandbox actually populated according to 3rd edition guidelines is not a friendly place. Actually pulling the strategy off requires careful scouting in low-level areas, hoping you won't stumble to significantly out-of-depth monsters which, according to encounter guidelines, make up 15% of total encounters, with 5% of total encounters being so much above you that you are not considered to have a chance against them & won't even gain experience for defeating them.

Fundamentally, no genuine complete strategy for this early part can be devised without knowing where in the sandbox a character starts, the available populations of nearby monsters, etc.. A similar caveat applies to continuously making Craft or Profession checks to increase available funds. The skill check rules only tell you how much money you get for a period of time, they do not prevent other events in that period of time! If there's a goblin warband planning to attack the settlement you're in during next week, guess what that's going to do to your plan to grind money this way. An alternative but equally frightening option is that all the enemies take the same time to raise funds, make equipment, etc.., and since enemies typically outnumber you, they will gain a larger advantage by doing this than you. Wasting huge amount of time doing low-efficiency work is not safe in a dynamic world.

[Crake]

Splitting hairs. I think that would be the LitRPG genre. Isekai tends to refer to the mechanic in which you die and reincarnate or are otherwise transfered into another (usually fantasy) world. There is overlap. Isekai may or may not have levels, exp, etc.

You're correct, but it is a fairly common trope within the isekai genre, and I would hazard a guess that more people are familiar with the term isekai.

Whether we are seeking to simulate or gamify a world is less of a distinction than a spectrum. Personally, I'm not fond of starfinder's ship system (in which your party's ship is based on character level) or 5e's NPC system (they don't play by the same rules as PCs) because to me, they are overly gamist. But I wouldn't have any issue with a player saying "you get stronger by overcoming challenging monsters, but the challenge must be meaningful" or "a wand of cure moderate wounds costs 4500gp because it is a spell of the second level of complexity." Even, with appropriate knowledge "the sleep spell is effective against basic monsters, but fails at about the same level of power at which clerics and wizards get spells of the third level of complexity, or at which a fighter is no longer debilitated by dragonfear". I would not expect a typical PC to say "YES, thats 35 exp!" But I would expect that an artificer might have a pretty good idea how much life energy he needs to make that next wand of CLW and possibly even units of measurement for that, so they can know how much to charge, or pay for someone else providing said lifeforce. I don't see any reason why something like a wizard school that has had tens of thousands of graduates for centuries wouldn't be able to tell you exactly which spells were appropriate for a caster of what levels, or even have level stand-ins, like "you have to know and cast 2 spells of this grade to be an initiate of the third order, which gets you a second stripe on your robe and lets you eat at the dining hall in the tower of mysteries."

In Eberron, or XCrawl, I would expect you could get a book describing the order in which classes get abilities, as those are industrialized magitech societies, and in XCrawl in particular I would expect particular in character knowledge about power levels, because you can't get into amateur level crawls if you demonstrate the following powers, and there is absolutely an NPC nerd glued to his screen with a spreadsheet calculating your character's hits against a hobgoblin in chainmail like a football fan charting yards thrown or interceptions, and he is dead on ready to say "ACTUALLY, a typical rank 2 sorcerer will know 2 spells of the first order and be able to cast 5 times in a crawl!" It would be more reality breaking if he couldn't do that.

The thing about all this is that many of those things are quantifyable in game. Even xp is quantifyable as a sort of life force/energy of a kind, though it's discreet quantities are about as diagetic as the discreet nature of hit points. I think it would probably be a bit more accurate to describe it as how much effort you are willing to put into simulationism, rather than whether your goal is simulationism. I'm sure there are some who seek to play ttrpgs for the gamification of it, but I think generally those players would be more attracted to computer games, or wargames, as gamification, and mechanics are much more core to those genres of games.

3.5 does of course, have the complexity to attract those seeking to gamify, but I think that isn't a positive thing in many people's eyes, as tey tend to see 3.5 as the "munchkin system for power gamers" which has driven so many people away from it.

[Endarire]

There is or was a PC Roguelike game called Incursion based on OGL 3.5ish rules. Early-game level grinding was encouraged, and level squatting (that is, not leveling ASAP but getting enough EXP to level once or almost twice more) was sometimes encouraged to ensure faster EXP growth.

In this game, I primarily played a Druid who shapeshifted and cast spells. Food was a concern, but corpses provided plenty of food. Sometimes, something too powerful spawned, which meant game over, but barricading doors was useful for recovery. At some point, early-game grinding was too much of a pain or it simply didn't give EXP, meaning I was encouraged to leave this loop and explore the world and play the game.

Thankee!

[Maat Mons]

The nice thing about Pathfinder is that you're never too high a level to gain xp from rats.

In 3.5, you can take the Wild Cohort feat and send your oversized rat terrier riding dog into all the town's rodent infested basements. If it dies, you get another one for free. If it kills some rats, you get xp. You don't even need to go into the basements yourself.

Then why when you kill someone you feel that sudden surge of elation and sense of power?

It's called "The Quickening."

Sorry, that's not how trolls work in D&D.

It is, however, how some types of ooze work. If you can lure the right kind of ooze into a pit you've prepared ahead of time, you can keep splitting it and killing the copy.

[Samael Morgenst]

In character, Limited knowledge

This one’s rather odd. If I tell my 0-level 5-year-old advisor about Thought Bottles and Lycanthropes, then it’s in character for them to know about such things. And some classes (like Wizard) involve extensive training under some usually quite knowledgeable people. So artificial knowledge limits are just that: artificial. Unless we’re playing Adam and Eve (dibs on… eh, never mind) or something similar, I’m gonna just ignore the artificial knowledge limits.

Realistically speaking, most people would not know much of the world in a setting that predates modern information system.
But a fairly wise character can "know he don't know" and do something about.
For example, the fighter/hunter I described before could spend some years studing as an oblate in a monastery and take a level of Cloistered Cleric (access to all Knowledge skills and the Lore Ex ability, that works as bardic knowledge).

But I would not appreciate completely unjustified metagame knowledge. Expecially from a character like an Int 4 half-orc Barbarian.

Repeatability

I mentioned this up above, but “are creatures finite?” is an important question for this challenge. It’s why people talk about “toad farms” rather than just random encounters at toad and fish lake in this kind of scenario.

And, unless the world is *super* genre-savvy, in character, one wouldn’t expect… oh, wait, people are idiots. Yeah, it could go either way as to whether, in character, a character would even consider stripping / wiping out the local wildlife.

Well, killing 40 between foxes, raccoons and ferrets (animals with similar CR) during the course of a year in a setting similar to medieval europe or precolonization americas is not going to cause extinctions.

But the issue of sustainability is one of the reasons why wild boars (and probably, dire boars too) are my prey of choice.

1. they are infestant, tough and reproduce quickly (here in Italy we have a problem with boars in many cities)
2. they damage crops and are dangerous to livestock, so most feudal age nobles allowed peasants to hunt them - or at least did not persecute boar hunters as hard as they did with deer poachers
3. they're edible and provide a lot of useful hide, meat, bone and fat.

[yeetusmcgeetus]

Sorry, that's not how trolls work in D&D. Only the largest still living bit regenerates. The rest of the body still lives for a while, but all it does is try to rejoin with the main body and dies in a day if it cannot.

...Huh. TIL. Also, apparently by 3.5 RAW the pieces don't retain mobility at all, they just auto-reattach if held back to where they should go.

It would be pretty weird to have trolls undergoing mitosis in a world where souls exist. Where would the other soul come from?

To be fair, where do babies' souls come from? Some could be reincarnation, but not all.

[Maat Mons]

You mentioned that Rogue could rival Fighter in terms of accessibility. I think Rogue actually exceeds Fighter in that regard.

Wilderness Rogue, to me, seems like the logical class for a typical hunter to wind up as. Ranger has too much of a mystical feel, and the Background entry for it in PHB lacks any mention of self-taught Rangers. Fighters have to train with weapons that most hunters would never have access to, such as greatswords, warhammers, and halberds. Wilderness Rogues have all the right skills, have the lowest training time, and Sneak Attack makes them very good at putting animals down in one hit from an ambush. Scout is a dumb class.

Martial Rogue seems like what all guard forces would train recruits as. You can’t be an effective guard without Listen, Sense Motive, and Spot. Diplomacy, Gather Information, Knowledge (local) are nice too. Light armor is all you can wear and still expect to chase down fleeing criminals. The Militia feat gives proficiency with all martial weapons. Then you’ve got bonus feats just like Fighter, and no Sneak Attack to conflict with the theme.

I think anyone with any sense would look around the world of D&D and conclude that becoming a spellcaster is clearly the best move. Spellcaster training is probably expensive, so it makes sense that not everyone can actually do that. Still, once you’ve got enough levels under your belt to lay your hands on some decent coin, I can’t imagine why a person wouldn’t retire from whatever they’d been doing before and start a new career in bending reality to their will.