XP and Leveling in AD&D

[S Ferguson]

This is actually two questions rolled into one:

Could I have DM's submit how they award XP?
How many do it the way in which the DMs Guide suggests (awarding XP for GP etc.)
Just curious. Also as a third "cross-game" question (in est from any edition), could I get DM's views on how they handle between-level training? This question was originally posed on the C&C forum, but I think it has more of a place here, amongst the "Classic Minded."

Cheers,
SF

[opusaug]

It's been awhile since I DM'd a Classic game, but...

I usually gave XP for monsters defeated straight up - that always seemed fair. I would give XP by value of treasure obtained, but because that was much more subjective, I occasionally used a multiplier based on the difficulty of the encounter where it was obtained. For instance, if it was too easy I might let the group have the money but say they only earned 0.2 xp per gp. But more often than not, what I'd do instead is change the value of the coinage... If things were too easy, 2000 gp became 5000 sp, and way too easy became 20000 cp. Then I'd award xp appropriately based on converted gp value.

The only time I worried about training was when I needed a cash sink or a time sink. If the players had too much gold, or were leveling too fast, time and money would be spent on training. And since our groups were fairly heavy in terms of RP, the better a player RP'd the more freely the gold would flow, and the better the chance that this would instigate roleplaying outside of real adventuring.

My players got into the habit of calling me "Scrooge", but it always seemed the more we played this give-and-take game, the better the RP was and the more we all enjoyed ourselves.

[leozelig]

I award xp for gp and magic items. If nobody wants a magic item, it can be sold and the resulting gp (and xp) distributed among the party, which is a rare occasion. Ignoring the xp-for-treasure rule results in very slow level progression, since monster xp is often less than half of the total xp awarded in a module. Incidentally, I award xp at the end of the adventure, with treasure being divided among the surviving PCs only, of course.

For training, I use 1,500 gp x CURRENT LEVEL, which is by the book for the most part. I do not "grade" the players or apply a multiple to the training cost as suggested in the DMG.

In my current group, we subtract training costs from the total treasure found, and then distribute the remaining gold evenly. It takes a little planning to make it work at lower levels, but it's possible. Selling a magic item to cover training costs is another solution if players are short the necessary funds.

If there is a higher level PC of the same class already in the party, then he/she can train the lower level PC, with the exchange of gold left up to the players. It takes 1 week to train, which is another reason I leave the xp award until the end of the adventure - it is an out-of-game event that occurs between adventures. For long adventures, I will award xp at a natural break point if possible.

We also decided that the paladin's church would gladly cover his training costs, provided he represents them honorably and donates generously. It ends up working out heavily in the church's favor at higher levels, but paladins cannot keep more than 200 gp anyway according to the PHB.

I think that basically covers it!

[dr_venture]

With AD&D I followed the rules: XP for kills, money, and magic. But when I started doing that with my FG games, the pace of the bi-weekly game combined with text-chat meant that it would take probably years for characters to level even once. I figure I want to level characters roughly once per 'adventure.' So after checking with my players, I started using the awards below (remember that I use Rolemaster criticals). I have just started doing this, so I don't know how successful or disastrous this will turn out... so far, fingers crossed, it seems pretty good:

Plot Points & Goals
Small plot goal or good idea: 25
Intermediate plot goal or plot insight: 100
Important plot point or really big insight: 200

Danger
Pretty safe with some danger (missile combat): 25
Potentially lethal (i.e. normal, hand-to-hand combat): 50
Risky behavior/real chance of serious injury or death: 100
Confronting almost certain death: 250

Kill, Defeat, or Save Another
Easy/weak: 20
Moderate/normal: 40
Difficult/tough: 100
Absurd/powerful: 300

Health and Critical Hits (given and received)
‘A’ Critical: 10
‘B’ Critical: 20
‘C’ Critical: 30
‘D’ Critical: 40
‘E’ Critical: 50
Near death (0 HP or less) - character only: 50

Maneuvers, Skill, & Spell Use
Routine/simple spell or skill use: 10
Moderate or normal / normal spell use: 20
Hard / spell used cleverly or good advantage: 50
Absurd / Spell used ingeniously or to turn the tide: 150

Misc.
Encounter with the supernatural: 25
Travel per mile: 1

All of the XP awarded,except the mileage XP, are multiplied by 75% or the character's level (yeah, I use a spreadsheet to just tally totals for each character).

So far fighters seem to get more Danger awards, but because melee only attacks once per round, the get fewer crits and kills... which seems to kinda balance the melee vs. missile combatants. Clerics do pretty well, as they often fight hand-to-hand, cast spells, save people, and seem to be thinkers, too. Wizards get little for combat in the way of kills or combat, but clean up with mass effect spells (say a sleep spell knocks out or 'defeats' 4 guys). I'm still fussing with it, but I think it at least shows promise.

I welcome observations.

[damned]

i also like my players to level up at *least* once per adventure - this usually takes several sessions per level at the least. sometime my players will *need* to level up to have any likelihood of completing an adventure... so that will often happen... i only award xp when players return to town. im trying to keep things simple at this stage so players dont have to train to level up currently. i broadly allocate xp based on how much happened each session and how much is required to keep them progressing... no strict formula...

[Answulf]

Add me to the list of GMs that accelerate level advancement on Fantasy Grounds campaigns. Regardless of what system I am using, I try to have the players advance about every other session.

[S Ferguson]

All in all, these are informative, good points so far. As per leveling up once an adventure. Would you say it's as Dr. V said because of time/typing constraints and irregular play hours inherent in a global community or is this just an inherent issue with AD&D inspired games. I would be under the assumption that at higher levels, the leveling pace would slow down as it gets harder and harder obtaining "experience" that the character could benefit from.

@Dr. V. It looks pretty good, if not a little RM inspired (not that I'm complaining).

Cheers (and keep it coming)
SF

[leozelig]

All in all, these are informative, good points so far. As per leveling up once an adventure. Would you say it's as Dr. V said because of time/typing constraints and irregular play hours inherent in a global community or is this just an inherent issue with AD&D inspired games. I would be under the assumption that at higher levels, the leveling pace would slow down as it gets harder and harder obtaining "experience" that the character could benefit from.

That is exactly what our group has seen... used to level every adventure, now it takes two or three adventures. One adventure can run for a month or two playing once a week, so that pace is still relatively slow. Any slower, and I think many players would lose interest.

[damned]

agreed - players play for the rp and the adventure but they do get that warm fuzzy feeling when they level up. low level characters in old school rulesets die too easy and really have such limited skills/abilities, it makes a huge difference keeping them leveling up every few sessions - both to them and to what you can throw at them :)
poor magic users who cast a sleep and a spider climb and then spend the next 6 hours hiding behind the clerics skirts...

[Callum]

This is actually two questions rolled into one:

Could I have DM's submit how they award XP?
How many do it the way in which the DMs Guide suggests (awarding XP for GP etc.)?


I do it the same way leozelig does it.
That is, the way the DMG suggests, apart from grading the players - they're all good!

I do occasionally hand out a bonus XP award for a particularly outstanding piece of play.

[S Ferguson]

I do it the same way leozelig does it.
That is, the way the DMG suggests, apart from grading the players - they're all good!I do occasionally hand out a bonus XP award for a particularly outstanding piece of play.

That's usually how I start awarding XP; for good roleplaying. Actually, the Paladium system of experience grading is how I usually "grade" players, In my tabletop games, in which you have a subjective system of distributing points, rather than an objective system. The only problem with that is that players tend to level up at lower levels quite easily, but the advancement at higher levels grinds to a standstill. Like Leozelig pointed out, players lose interest except when they are getting what the dammed called "that warm fuzzy feeling" of leveling up. Dr. V's system is close to what I use in tabletop games. I just haven't quite figured out how to grade "roleplaying" in an, for those T.V. inspired, "episode" of FG, where I find more metagaming than roleplaying. Do others find that to be true? Usually, in the TT games I run, I'm playing with a group that enjoys roleplaying over arguing over the rules, but that might be because of the game I'm running (C&C right now); I'm deathly afraid of moving back to "well the DM's Guide says this and the Monster Manual II states that" style of play. But I'm pining for a good old game of AD&D.

Thoughts?
SF

[sehmerus]

for my Basic D&D games I award Xp based on Coins found, and also Magic items gold value if sold (divided among the party) and i give it to them based on how much they got for it not how much its worth. also i have them keep track of their bonus XP rewards.

Bonus rewards are the 5 or 10 % based on prime requisite stats, plus i add the following bonus'es as well.

Fighter= 10Xp per monster defeated
Magic-user= 10XP per spell cast
thief= 5xp per Kill, & 5xp per successful use of thier skill
cleric= 10xp per spell, 10xp per save ally from dying. and 20XP per Sermon
Elf= 5xp per spell & 5xp per enemy Defeated
Dwarf= 10xp, per monster defeated, +20xp per Orc or Giant killed.
Halfling= 10xp per monster defeated

[dr_venture]

A lot of folks do award XP for good role playing, but I've never really done that as I've known too many gamers who are just uncomfortable with it. They prefer to just kind of meta game the adventure and treat their character more like a pawn than a persona. They play more in the vein of, "I go to the captain of the guard and try to convince him to lower the gate" ... rather than playing through the conversation in character. Those guys can sometimes be avid gamers, but just not really 'role players.' For me, that's totally fine - I've had fantastic games both with very detailed role playing variety (my old west game is sometimes entirely role playing without a die rolled) and with the more removed meta-gaming approach. As long as it's fun, I'm OK with whatever.

I guess what I'm looking for in awarding XP is the player participating in the game by finding a way to advance the cause of themselves or the party, whether that is melee, spells, saving a life, good ideas, or role playing. I wouldn't award XP for just good role playing by itself (like a great campfire conversation, for instance) unless it was related to the advancement of the story/plot/party goals. Great campfire conversations and player interactions are rewards unto themselves :D

[S Ferguson]

A lot of folks do award XP for good role playing, but I've never really done that as I've known too many gamers who are just uncomfortable with it. They prefer to just kind of meta game the adventure and treat their character more like a pawn than a persona. They play more in the vein of, "I go to the captain of the guard and try to convince him to lower the gate" ... rather than playing through the conversation in character. Those guys can sometimes be avid gamers, but just not really 'role players.' For me, that's totally fine - I've had fantastic games both with very detailed role playing variety (my old west game is sometimes entirely role playing without a die rolled) and with the more removed meta-gaming approach. As long as it's fun, I'm OK with whatever.

I guess what I'm looking for in awarding XP is the player participating in the game by finding a way to advance the cause of themselves or the party, whether that is melee, spells, saving a life, good ideas, or role playing. I wouldn't award XP for just good role playing by itself (like a great campfire conversation, for instance) unless it was related to the advancement of the story/plot/party goals. Great campfire conversations and player interactions are rewards unto themselves :D

I always loved the "former killer in the woods" one. :) No, I feel that, as Kevin Siembeida would say, a character with an intelligence of 6 who's a jet-fuel genius who plays "in character" deserves a reward for it. Ditto for coming up with plans that don't advance the party but are still "worthy" ideas. They might not advance the plot, but might bring new insight into a character or facet of the adventure you'd (as GM) never have considered - A "clever idea," but futile in furthering the plot. I also reward for "good judgment." I award for Daring (clever or not), "self-sacrifice" and grade encounters on minor, major and great menaces. Basically it's the Palladium system modified for D&D (with a fair bit of Rolemaster filling in the blanks).

I agree that a good campfire story is a reward in itself, but the key word is reward. If it entertains the other characters (and the GM) I say reward the player. I guess I'm more used to role-playing rather than roll-playing. AD&D seems to enforce the latter while the Basic Set seemed to enforce the former. I guess that's why I wound up house ruling XP Rules a lot in AD&D and Basic D&D when the 1e Paladium System came out.

Online with VOIP you'd think your inhibitions would be a little higher, preventing some from the "ham-it-up school to "background players." But I recently had a one-off game where the role playing was intense and you literally got caught up in the "acting" of your character. I find in FG, sometimes the nature of the "token on a map" pushes you into roll-playing mode, which is why I prefer not to use them (it also saves a lot of headache with layers, scaling. and what-have-you's). Mind you the sessions I run are sort of in a three act play format with short breaks between acts, where the adventures are based more on an Aristotle 5 Act structure, with an act a session (or more). Hence the players level up, but not because of gold found (now there's a reward in itself), but because of what they bring to the game, in terms of their character.

I cut my teeth in role-playing with the Original Rules, Runequest and The Fantasy Trip (as Melee and Wizardry were my grognard rules for mano de mano combat), and I guess because I was playing with an older crowd, roleplaying was emphasized. When the dice don't touch the table it seems that is where my niche in XP awarding lies. When the dice were rolled behind the screen, tension arose.

Thoughts?
SF

[Mistindantacles]

I guess then I am on the outside, as I do *not*, and never have, awarded XP for treasure or monies. From my perspective, gaining the "l00tz" is a prize in and of itself.

Think of it like this - "You win a brand new car! It's worth $60,000, so in addition to the casr, you get 60 grand in cash, too!"

It seems kind of ridiculous.

Now, as to how I award XP:

(1) For killing monsters, of course.
(2) For completing adventures or completing campaign arcs
(3) Exceptional role-play / puzzle solving

Well, how do I compute 2 and 3? Well, it's quite simple. I let the players roll for XP.

That's right ... the players roll for it.

There are 6 dice: d4, d6, d8, d10, d12, and d20. I let one player roll a d6. Now, this determines the the die to be rolled for the multiplier that will be used in the XP calculation. So a 1 on the d6 roll means that the multiplier die is the d4, a 2 means the multiplier is a d6, etc ... up to 6 being a d20.

Then, a second player rolls the multiplier die. The number rolled is the multiplier.

A third player rolls d100. That roll times the multiplier is then multiplied by the average character level in the party for the bonus XP for completing an adventure or campaign arc.

Hope you could follow all of that.

If it's a difficult puzzle that someone finds a succint solution to, or solves it in an 'A-HA!" moment, then then I generally use a d4 multiplier times the d100 times the character level.


But that's just me.

[Answulf]

That is pretty bizarre... so for completing an adventure they are getting a random amount of XP between 1-2000 x lvl?

To each his own, but that is probably the most unusual way I've heard it done. From a player's perspective that seems like it would suck to complete an adventure and then get like 10xp for it. A couple of bad rolls in a row and the players are just treading water. I'd have a mutiny in my group! :)

I agree with you on the concept of XP for gold, however. I don't usually give XP for gold either, but when I do I use a house rule that they don't get the XP for the gold until they spend it. Keeps their money scarce and a bit more valuable.

[S Ferguson]

I really have to concur. Does this method actually work in practice? I have to admit I never thought of XP as being determined randomly. It cuts down on the amount of complaining, I guess, but could prove to have awfully slow leveling, unless you throw creatures at them. I'm curious to hear how it would work, though. in an actual gaming session; I mean aside from the math aspect of it, rather more from a leveling issue side. (Personally I'd like the $60,000 along with the car - but then I'm not a player usually).

[JohnD]

Personally I care more about the adventure than the level gain... but I DM 99.9999% of the time (possibly an under estimation...), so I prefer slow level gains.

That said, my preferred advancement rate at the frequency of an on-line game with adults struggling to make time in-between family, children, spouse, work, etc... well it would be a year worth of play to make 2nd level.

In these days/times, that just won't fly. So, I really just determine whether or not I want characters to have gained a level by the end of a finite adventure, and if so it happens (there are some basic calculations involved) - I give close to 50% of my XP for story/plot/character advancement, not kills or treasure found.

In Pathfinder I award XP as per the guidelines, but adopt the "slow" advancement rate so PCs need more than the standard amounts to gain a level.

Training is something I like to pursue when PCs level... but in an on-line world this seems to meet with resistance, so I just gloss over it with a blanket cost and an assumed amount of time having passed.

[dr_venture]

Hmmm... perhaps I'm not understanding some other DM's thoughts on the value of role playing in character advancement. I appreciate DM's wanting to reward good roleplaying by awarding XP for it, as it's an aspect of the game that is core to RPGs and fun. A player invests themselves into a session, and the DM wants to reward that - I understand the desire to reward that.

But for me it's all about rewarding characters with XP for things that would most likely cause that character to advance in their profession, or as an adventurer. An argument can always be made that everything a character does advances their understanding of the world, but a line does have to drawn somewhere, practically speaking... which is what we're talking about.

I'd award XP for a Rogue that roleplays a conversation with a noble, sweet talking his way into the person's home in order to pilfer something - he's accomplished something he can learn from, and be better at his profession. But I'd reward that Rogue equally whether he played the whole encounter out with a proper accent and witty banter, or whether the player simply said (as many of mine prefer to do), "I'm going to use my Charisma to chat up the rich guy and see if I can get access to his house."

I wouldn't reward the rogue for having a Oscar-worthy performance at the game table for conversation with an very important NPC if it didn't advance either the character's personal or professional goals/story, or the party's goals/story. If something was achieved by chuming up to the NPC, whether through role play or simple statement by the player, I'd reward it.

I've just had too many players who aren't comfortable roleplaying to the degree that other players are. They're very uncomfortable 'acting.' They absolutely love the game, are avid and regular players, but they're just not comfortable stepping as far into their character's shoes as other players are. As a DM I get that too, I have absolutely no problem with it. My only goal is for them to have fun playing and get into the game to whatever degree in which they're comfortable.

I would say that I think roleplaying a character naturally leads to more opportunities for gaining XP, because, well, things tend to just come up in conversation, just like in real life. I do my best to be fair, but I've definitely had subjects and information come up if roleplayed conversations that I never expected to come up at all, and players have benefited from this, and indeed have gotten XP from that conversation. I try to be fair to the non-extroverted players an allow for this to a degree, but it is what it is - some methods of game play are more effective than others. I can't change that, but I can make the non-extroverted feel comfortable and level their playing field a bit.

[S Ferguson]

Personally I care more about the adventure than the level gain... but I DM 99.9999% of the time (possibly an under estimation...), so I prefer slow level gains.

That said, my preferred advancement rate at the frequency of an on-line game with adults struggling to make time in-between family, children, spouse, work, etc... well it would be a year worth of play to make 2nd level.

In these days/times, that just won't fly. So, I really just determine whether or not I want characters to have gained a level by the end of a finite adventure, and if so it happens (there are some basic calculations involved) - I give close to 50% of my XP for story/plot/character advancement, not kills or treasure found.

In Pathfinder I award XP as per the guidelines, but adopt the "slow" advancement rate so PCs need more than the standard amounts to gain a level.

Training is something I like to pursue when PCs level... but in an on-line world this seems to meet with resistance, so I just gloss over it with a blanket cost and an assumed amount of time having passed.

Yes, I too only play in three games now. The rest I'm Game Mastering. I would prefer the slow gain, but as you pointed out, it's difficult on line. Leveling is something I've always associated with training and somehow that peters out to a long-haul of metagaming just to get things going, or like you said, you gloss it over. I personally enjoy roleplaying the gaining of experience, but with the number of classes (usually 4 in my campaigns) you literally have to spend a day with each, roleplaying there advancements. That is, if they have the time to spare from real life to virtual life. I think that's why I get a little generous on XP for roleplaying the adventure with the character you play. A little less for things you have to gloss over.;)

[Mistindantacles]

To answer folks questions:

Well, the top end of the XP award goes up every level. If you're level 1, you have the chance of gaining that 2000 XP (divided by the number in the party). By level 10, though, that number jumps to 20, 000. (You were fore-going the last multiplier, which is the average level across the party ... but I probably did not explain it well enough, so my bad.)

As far as how players take to it ... pretty well, actually. They feel they have a hand in how much extra XP they earn, first of all. Secondly, it becomes a "mini-game" to them, to see how close they can get to maximum.

It works especially well in a campaign setting, where you may have 7 - 10 or more story arcs - with bonus XPs coming at the end of every arc.

Characters running with me tend to level at pace of 1 level every 2 -3 sessions for the "lowbie" levels (5 and under), and in the 5 - 7 range for "high levels" (14+), which I think is a fair-ish balance. This way they can get a good feel for their character at each level; it's *not* about racing to 20, a la JohnD.

My games have a tendency to be RP heavy, with lots of puzzles and mysteries. When there are battles, they have a tendency to be on the "huge grand epic" scale. Because they're more fun.

I hope that answers some of your questions.

[S Ferguson]

Hmmm... perhaps I'm not understanding some other DM's thoughts on the value of role playing in character advancement. I appreciate DM's wanting to reward good roleplaying by awarding XP for it, as it's an aspect of the game that is core to RPGs and fun. A player invests themselves into a session, and the DM wants to reward that - I understand the desire to reward that.

But for me it's all about rewarding characters with XP for things that would most likely cause that character to advance in their profession, or as an adventurer. An argument can always be made that everything a character does advances their understanding of the world, but a line does have to drawn somewhere, practically speaking... which is what we're talking about.

I'd award XP for a Rogue that roleplays a conversation with a noble, sweet talking his way into the person's home in order to pilfer something - he's accomplished something he can learn from, and be better at his profession. But I'd reward that Rogue equally whether he played the whole encounter out with a proper accent and witty banter, or whether the player simply said (as many of mine prefer to do), "I'm going to use my Charisma to chat up the rich guy and see if I can get access to his house."

I wouldn't reward the rogue for having a Oscar-worthy performance at the game table for conversation with an very important NPC if it didn't advance either the character's personal or professional goals/story, or the party's goals/story. If something was achieved by chuming up to the NPC, whether through role play or simple statement by the player, I'd reward it.

I've just had too many players who aren't comfortable roleplaying to the degree that other players are. They're very uncomfortable 'acting.' They absolutely love the game, are avid and regular players, but they're just not comfortable stepping as far into their character's shoes as other players are. As a DM I get that too, I have absolutely no problem with it. My only goal is for them to have fun playing and get into the game to whatever degree in which they're comfortable.

I would say that I think roleplaying a character naturally leads to more opportunities for gaining XP, because, well, things tend to just come up in conversation, just like in real life. I do my best to be fair, but I've definitely had subjects and information come up if roleplayed conversations that I never expected to come up at all, and players have benefited from this, and indeed have gotten XP from that conversation. I try to be fair to the non-extroverted players an allow for this to a degree, but it is what it is - some methods of game play are more effective than others. I can't change that, but I can make the non-extroverted feel comfortable and level their playing field a bit.

I'm beginning to think some of my groups are 'hamming it up just to gain the extra XP.

I find that your party has to be comfortable playing with each other into order to get the introverts to shine, but then there's always introverted characters that they could probably play to a tee¢° a quiet, sullen barbarian; a scheming rogue who doesn't trust anyone; an "unsocialized" ranger or druid; or a bookwormish wizard covers most of the base classes. Then, as the extroverts play, the introverts can be awarded for "mildly speaking their voice" and eventually get more comfortable roleplaying. That was my initial attraction to the hobby (it's now the knowledge of over 50 game systems (and the tidbits of knowledge that go with them) that have been played over the course of my career as GM).

And, I agree the conversation has to lead somewhere, or further the character's background for XP, but I would give more points to the thief that made the eloquent speech, rather than describe the actions they take. I'm just a sucker for Oscar (tm) winning performances, especially if it furthers the characters growth which is really the underlying topic here¢° Character growth. How you award XP (an artificial measure of growth in a profession) and why you award it in that particular way.

Cheers,
SF

[S Ferguson]

To answer folks questions:

Well, the top end of the XP award goes up every level. If you're level 1, you have the chance of gaining that 2000 XP (divided by the number in the party). By level 10, though, that number jumps to 20, 000. (You were fore-going the last multiplier, which is the average level across the party ... but I probably did not explain it well enough, so my bad.)

As far as how players take to it ... pretty well, actually. They feel they have a hand in how much extra XP they earn, first of all. Secondly, it becomes a "mini-game" to them, to see how close they can get to maximum.

It works especially well in a campaign setting, where you may have 7 - 10 or more story arcs - with bonus XPs coming at the end of every arc.

Characters running with me tend to level at pace of 1 level every 2 -3 sessions for the "lowbie" levels (5 and under), and in the 5 - 7 range for "high levels" (14+), which I think is a fair-ish balance. This way they can get a good feel for their character at each level; it's *not* about racing to 20, a la JohnD.

My games have a tendency to be RP heavy, with lots of puzzles and mysteries. When there are battles, they have a tendency to be on the "huge grand epic" scale. Because they're more fun.

I hope that answers some of your questions.

I agree. Mass Epic Combat (tm) is a blast. I adore rules that include them.

[damned]

Ultimately Im happy for players to level up every 2-5 sessions because as they get more powerful I can get meaner and nastier with them... looks like lots of different ways of handing out experience - and certainly some interesting ones.
As to handing out XP for treasure - i too think its kinda lame - but the XP for defeating monsters is set so low tno one goes anywhere... personally setting monster XP *way* higher seems more logical if you are being strict....

[Mistindantacles]

I apologize, S Ferguson, in that so focused on XP awarding I ended up completely ignoring the second part of your OP -
... how they handle between-level training

I assume you mean how I, as a DM, handle chracter leveling - "What training needs take place?" etc ... So that is the question I will answer.

For me, it depends on the setting. I have allowed leveling on the spot (in-between battles), automatically after the end of an adventure or campaign story arc, and have required PCs to seek out trainer NPCs.

I don't run too many published adventures anymore, probably because I ran them so much in high school and in college that I've become bored with them; so most of my DMing is in home-brew environments.

If it's a readily established and orderly society that has strong government and religious organizations, more often than not I'll require trraining at a trainer. However, if it's a weastern Europe c. 700AD type of setting, with mercurial government structure and sporadically available religious authority, I am more inclined to allow instant leveling.

But it's also a matter of role-play as well - are the players more role-play oriented (lending itself to a "seek out a trainer to level" rule) or are they more action oriented (lending itself to the "instant gratification" rule).

With regards to approach, i think it important that I, as a DM, be flexible to find common ground so that everyone is having a good time. If not, then what's the point?

[JohnD]

I usually require time to pass for training, but in some cases not. For example in 3.5e/PF if the PC is advancing in Sorcerer or Warlock, where the powers are self learned or just kind of appear... I simply require a period of rest no less than 8 hours.

[Mistindantacles]

Yeah, even for those "instant" levle-ups, it's normally during a rest period after a battle. In fact, I cannot remember any instance where there was a battle, the heroes leveled, and walked around the corner directly into another battle.

But like I said, my battles have a tendency to be big bad epic events. :)

[JohnD]

But like I said, my battles have a tendency to be big bad epic events. :)
With a good DM almost any encounter can be turned into an epic experience! :)

[S Ferguson]

With a good DM almost any encounter can be turned into an epic experience! :)

My favorite is the scritching noise in the background. The players always go for their weapons. Could be just a few rats or....:)