Hello. I apologize for jumping in but I'm just starting up a campaign and I'm a novice DM.. After reading through this, I'm thinking of using the blended version, both xp per encounter and a nice little prize per milestone. How do you feel about players maybe not having the same xp level? If you're fair across the board with people getting out what they put in, how do you avoid someone becoming a lot more powerful than the other people? Or should I just explain this out right to my players that they will earn as they do and participate so that they are all trying and not shying away? I apologize for my ignorance, but we all started somewhere.. 

Thank you.

For the most part 1-2 levels won't make a major difference in the way the game plays due to the bounded accuracy. You will notice power spikes at level 3, 5, 10ish, and 15ish when the classes tend to get new tools. As long as you're giving everyone a fair chance to participate in the different scenes that come along, you'll be fine. 

It's too easy to get caught up in combat as the main source of XP, make sure to mix it up with social and location based encounters as well. Does the player who persuaded the guard to let the party pass get XP? Does the Rogue get XP for disarming a trap? Does the Fighter get XP for training the local militia? There are numerous ways to grant XP to help those players who are behind catch up without relying on combat. 

You're new, so don't put too much stress on yourself, play with the XP rewards, find what feels best for you and your group. As I said in an earlier comment, some groups want XP, some groups prefer Milestone, so it's going to vary table by table.

I explain this to my Players up front, so they're aware of it.

The bonuses I give out for "rewarded behavior" ( successful problem solving, uncovering word lore, Character development ) aren't huge - typically equal to 1/2 of an Easy Encounter ( have a look here ), so the skew shouldn't ever be too large. Just enough to encourage behavior, not to make that behavior overpoweringly advantageous.

Having some Players get ahead of others can actually be an incentive for some Players to "pull up their socks" and become more active. This would depend on your Players.

If it happens that some of your Players just won't participate, and the XP gaps are getting larger and larger, and don't show any sign of anyone willing to close them ... that is a problem, and you'll need to discuss it with your Players. It is probably that case that there's a disconnect in what people think should go into a good game - either between you and your Players and/or among your Players.

Not all advancement systems work for all tables.  You'll have to decide whether or not the advancement system you choose for your table does what you want it to do.

Thank you both!  I'm wanting to build up a campaign that weaves character backstories throughout the main plot, so it will definitely be more than combat, but that's also why I was asking about participation. If I do see someone dragging behind a little, maybe I can intentionally throw something there way to where they really need to get their bum in gear, and if that doesn't work then definitely an ooc convo. I appreciate sharing the excel table, that will help for sure. Thank you again.

You're describing a checkpoint leveling system not milestone.  Go back and read milestone leveling in the DMG p261.  Milestone are plot points or some significant means by which the players advanced the story, either in a major or minor way.  Think of it as a means where the DM may reward good roleplaying, exploration and problem solving not just killing monsters and combat. 

If combat is all you're interested in then there are online tools that can let you re balance an encounter on the fly and more power to you, but the groups I run tend to like RP and exploration and tend to cycle through them (a few sessions that are heavy combat, then a few that are heavy exploration and then a couple that are primarily RP).   

You're not wrong - but most people don't make that fine a distinction.

"Milestone Leveling" is used - incorrectly, and not by everyone, but pretty much always by someone - to describe actual Milestone leveling, Story Based Advancement, Session Based Advancement, and straight up DM Fiat leveling; basically anything that's not XP based leveling.

I find actual Milestones very useful, as well as in-game XP bonuses for certain in game achievements  - but I translate them into XP.

I don't have the DMG, and the link Vedexent says I don't have access to it. I apologize for my ignorance with not using the terminology correctly. But that's also why I was asking questions about it. Thank you for correcting me.

I've been running a weekly campaign for over a year now and the character have advanced 5 levels. Yes you heard right 5 levels. Now you might think that is very slow but its definitely deliberate. I want the characters  and players to immerse themselves in the world and NPCs the campaign is set in so I've slowed down level progression on purpose. One of my players still calculate XP just to let everyone know what level the group would be if we weren't using Milestone Progression. I think on last count it was 2 levels.

I think the biggest strength of Milestone Progression is the baility for DM's to control when players go up. In means you can plan adventures and encounters with more certainty. It means you can plan for the group to level up when their is more time for them to make decisions and changes to their characters. The problems with it is that the players can get frustrated with the uncertainty of advancement but I try and offset this by explaining to them that they will go up at the end of any major plot advancement ie Finding the Secret message in the Old Ruins, returning the Dwarven Crown, Capturing the Hull Harpoons from the Sea Devils Temple etc.

The XP system is great for players. It means they have a numerical measure to discern when they will level up. They can plan for it. They feel more control of their progression. It is almost exclusively based on combat though. While some encounters and skill based challenges can earn you XP, the biggest means of gains XP is through combat. In a game that purely uses XP to level up, this discourages players to Roleplay imho. Why bother spend time developing a guild, a castle, even make friends/allies if they are not going to give me XP?

In the end I use Milestone XP because I'm lazy...and it helps me better plan, place enforces on certain roleplay encounters, mysteries and plot points outside of combat. Its a no brainer for me

Quote from Delvesdeep >>

I've been running a weekly campaign for over a year now and the character have advanced 5 levels. Yes you heard right 5 levels. Now you might think that is very slow but its definitely deliberate. I want the characters  and players to immerse themselves in the world and NPCs the campaign is set in so I've slowed down level progression on purpose. One of my players still calculate XP just to let everyone know what level the group would be if we weren't using Milestone Progression. I think on last count it was 2 levels.

I think the biggest strength of Milestone Progression is the baility for DM's to control when players go up. In means you can plan adventures and encounters with more certainty. It means you can plan for the group to level up when their is more time for them to make decisions and changes to their characters. The problems with it is that the players can get frustrated with the uncertainty of advancement but I try and offset this by explaining to them that they will go up at the end of any major plot advancement ie Finding the Secret message in the Old Ruins, returning the Dwarven Crown, Capturing the Hull Harpoons from the Sea Devils Temple etc.

The XP system is great for players. It means they have a numerical measure to discern when they will level up. They can plan for it. They feel more control of their progression. It is almost exclusively based on combat though. While some encounters and skill based challenges can earn you XP, the biggest means of gains XP is through combat. In a game that purely uses XP to level up, this discourages players to Roleplay imho. Why bother spend time developing a guild, a castle, even make friends/allies if they are not going to give me XP?

In the end I use Milestone XP because I'm lazy...and it helps me better plan, place enforces on certain roleplay encounters, mysteries and plot points outside of combat. Its a no brainer for me

With the proviso that my remarks are based on my style of game, that your style of game may be different ... yadda yadda yadda ....

"...they will go up at the end of any major plot advancement ie Finding the Secret message in the Old Ruins, returning the Dwarven Crown, Capturing the Hull Harpoons from the Sea Devils Temple etc." - First, let's be clear. You are not using Milestones - you are using Story Based Advancement. See here, or somewhere around Page 260 in the DMG under Experience Points. Milestones and Story Based Advancement are very different systems.

"Now you might think that is very slow but its definitely deliberate" - you can control the rate of progression under any advancement system. If you want to change the rate from RAW - and I can't blame you; I do as well - it's easy to scale XP. Give out 1/2 XP, or double XP, or whatever modifier you wish. This isn't an ability reserved to Story Based Advancement, so it's not really an argument for or against any particular advancement system.

"The XP system is great for players ... It is almost exclusively based on combat though." - No, no, no, no, NO! It is almost exclusively based on combat only in the hands of a DM who doing it wrong. It is repeatedly stated that D&D is structured around three (3!) pillars: Combat, Social Interaction, and Exploration. If you are not rewarding all three, you are chopping out 2/3 of the game rewards system. If you break a system, you lose the right to complain that the system is broken. I was initially confused by the idea that you'd been playing every week for a year, and would have only gone up 2 levels based on XP. I was picturing a bunch of character actors sitting around doing an acting exercise, and not much else - but if you're only giving out XP for combat, that makes more sense - you're only accounting for a fraction of what should be rewarded.

"I want the characters  and players to immerse themselves in the world and NPCs the campaign " - then reward them for this. It's basic motivational psychology - so simple that even Dogs and Hamsters do it. We pursue activities that are rewarded and/or benefit us. If you want to encourage certain behaviors in your game, reward them. If you want to discourage certain behaviors, penalize them. You can do this with XP, just as easily as with any other advancement system - in fact much easier, since XP is so fine grained - we literally can dial down these rewards to hundredths or thousandths of a level.

This is why I have reverted to XP leveling, with proper Milestones. I give XP rewards for all three pillars of the game. Players get XP for combat, solving social situations, exploring and uncovering world lore, clever & successful problem solving, and Character development ( not character acting, but actual development ). They get rewarded for clever thinking, creativity, role-playing, and all three facets of the game - almost like it was a role-playing game.

"In a game that purely uses XP to level up, this discourages players to Roleplay imho. Why bother spend time developing a guild, a castle, even make friends/allies if they are not going to give me XP?" - then give them XP!  Again - reward the behaviors you want to promote. This is, in fact, what Milestones ( proper Milestones ) are for: you attach XP rewards to certain accomplishments. It can be a story beat accomplishment; it can be a "build a castle/guild/community" accomplishment; it can be a "we gathered the Northern tribes into an alliance in a feat of diplomacy and negotiation" accomplishment. Whatever activities and accomplishments you wish to promote in your game, can be rewarded by this mechanism.

"The XP system is great for players. It means they have a numerical measure to discern when they will level up. They can plan for it. They feel more control of their progression." Yes. Absolutely. And I would add, it's a means for them to gauge what in-game, in-world activities are beneficial to them. Why on Earth would you take this away from your Players? Why are you inflicting "the uncertainty of advancement" on them, forcing them to stumble around the narrative landscape, pulling on story levers, looking for the magical "level up" story beat? Telling your Players there is a point that they'll level up at, but not telling them what it is - that would piss me off as a Player: "You've set up a goal for me, won't reward me until I hit it, but won't tell me what it is?!". It doesn't matter if you know what it is, where it is, and how close your Players are to it - they have no clue. You might think you're not jerking your Players around because you can see where and how they'll level up , but you have perfect DM knowledge - it might look very different from the Player level.

What you are essentially telling the Players is: your ideas of Character and Party goals don't matter. Only those goals that I have decided upon ahead of time as significant, will be rewarded.

"I think the biggest strength of Milestone Progression is the [ability] for DM's to control when players go up. In means you can plan adventures and encounters with more certainty", "In the end I use Milestone XP because I'm lazy...and it helps me better plan". These. These right here, are the persistent core arguments I keep hearing in defense of Story Based Advancement, and Session Based Advancement: It's easier for me as the DM; it allows me, as a DM, to better control the story. And these DM-screwing-the-Players reasons are being advanced repeatedly as benefits of these systems. 

1. DMs do not control the story; stop trying. It's our world; it's their story. If you want to write a play, go write a play. Don't trick a bunch of people into thinking they're going to have free will within a game context, and them make them actors in a story flow that you've pre-determined. It never works. How many threads in forums do you see about Players going "off the rails" and doing things the DM never planned for? Player/Game control by the DM is an illusion. Let it go.
2. DM'ing properly, effectively, and enjoyably for your Players is work; if you're not willing to put in the work, don't DM: This is true of pretty much anything in life, but it really rings true in DM'ing. If you're willing to short change your Players, take away their fun, their freedom, or their sense of ongoing accomplishment, only to make your life easier - that's just being unfair.

If you are unwilling, incapable, or terrified, of adapting your story to your Players' actions, strive to be better ( IMHO, we should all be striving to be better DMs, all the time ) - you don't need to take away your Players' freedom, level of certainty, or sense of growth and progression, to make your life easier. I think the vast majority of us are capable of it, and it's rewarding and fun for Players and DMs alike. I am constantly amused, entertained, impressed, and surprised by my Players - because I'm not trying to "herd cats" and shoo them toward pre-determined significant story points so they can level up. As a result, my Players choose their own goals, and tackle events they way they see fit - often in novel and more creative ways than I could ever have come up with if I was pre-scripting the story ( that's OK, they outnumber me 5:1, it's not unreasonable that 5 people can come up with more ideas than just one ). And they are rewarded for the accomplishments they make against the goals that they select - because they know that creativity, exploration, and interaction ( even combat interaction ), are rewarded behaviors - via XP bonuses.

Grow into the demands of the game. Learn to shape your game, reward your Players for the activities you want to see in your game, and collaborate with your Players on the story. Give them an concrete and ongoing sense of progression and accomplishment.

In my mind, this is most easily, and most precisely, accomplished through XP, and XP Milestones.

You just hit the issue though.  XP from combat is assigned, the rules are very clearly stated in the books and can vary by difficulty, but overall you get the XP based around the monsters in the encounter. The entire section on non-combat encounters is basically 'DM may reward XP for noncombat - but only if significant risk of failure.'  The basic rules repeatedly mention the three tiers of play and even mention giving reward for the other two, but provide nothing to back it up. 

Incorrect. Ironically, the information is listed in the DMG under the correct definition of Milestones.

You can also award XP when characters complete significant milestones. When preparing your adventure, designate certain events or challenges as milestones, as with the following examples:

• Accomplishing one in a series of goals necessary to complete the adventure.
• Discovering a hidden location or piece of information relevant to the adventure.
• Reaching an important destination.

When awarding XP, treat a major milestone as a hard encounter and a minor milestone as an easy encounter.

Note that's "as in the following examples", not "here, in this exhaustive list".

It's not as detailed as the XP for combat section, and requires a little bit of intelligent application, I admit, but it's there. You state "The basic rules repeatedly mention the three tiers of play and even mention giving reward for the other two, but provide nothing to back it up."  Incorrect. That block of rules is explicitly listing uncovering of world lore, and exploration ( second and third bullet points ), as XP milestone reward candidates - and I would argue that bypassing impediments to solving the adventure through socially interactive means falls under "Accomplishing one in a series of goals necessary to complete the adventure." It then goes on to tell you how much XP to award for these: "treat a major milestone as a hard encounter and a minor milestone as an easy encounter."

So why isn't that being done? Because WoTC didn't detail out a complex system for you, they just gave general guidelines ( as above ) and you can't be bothered to apply them? If you don't apply them, are you really in a moral position to be able to complain that since you didn't apply advancement rewards correctly that the system doesn't work? My car doesn't work if I don't service it, or put fuel in it. Is that the manufacturers fault? Should I just tell my passengers "sorry, guess it's broken, and I can't actually take you to school/work. Guess that's just the way it's going to be, because the car was designed badly!"

If you can't be bothered to think critically, or put in the work as a DM, that's on you. Do what you want at your table. But don't expect me to swallow the BS that your failure to apply systems correctly, and you screwing over your Players by taking away their sense of continual progression, narrative freedom, and the clear communication of the the expectations you have for your Players and your game - for no other reason other than it makes your job easier in that you don't have to think about your encounter designs, it allows you to retain all the Narrative control to yourself, and relives you of the need to adapt your adventure to the Players' actions - is somehow virtuous, and must magically enable "players to immerse themselves in the world and NPCs the campaign is set in".  

Quote from Vedexent >>

If you can't be bothered to think critically, or put in the work as a DM, that's on you. Do what you want at your table. But don't expect me to swallow the BS that your failure to apply systems correctly, and you screwing over your Players by taking away their sense of continual progression, narrative freedom, and the clear communication of the the expectations you have for your Players and your game - for no other reason other than it makes your job easier in that you don't have to think about your encounter designs, it allows you to retain all the Narrative control to yourself, and relives you of the need to adapt your adventure to the Players' actions - is somehow virtuous, and must magically enable "players to immerse themselves in the world and NPCs the campaign is set in".  

Gee I wonder why I use milestone leveling and not the vague rules presented in the DMG for encounter building for non-combat?  Could it be so the "players to immerse themselves in the world and NPCs the campaign is set in" and I get to layout a story line and they get to follow it. The basic premise is the XP system is old and outdated and the DM is also playing the game and supposed to be having fun as well.  If your session prep time takes hours to setup each encounter and you're constantly rebalancing them each time.  I run a much more sandybox game and once everything is established it is 75% player driven. I do have encounters written up and BBEG plots going and the players interact with them.  However I try not to force them along a given path.  I've had entire section of story laid out and multiple levels of content and the group bypass it because something shiny caught their attention.

As for  "Because WoTC didn't detail out a complex system for you, they just gave general guidelines ( as above ) and you can't be bothered to apply them?"  Yep, imagine coming into this from adventure league. 

Quote from Discfan2 >>

Don't forget the other side of the equation, you can also hold leveling back a bit.  One of the nice things about milestone is that you don't have to feel rushed with the party out leveling the adventure, especially if you had a heavy rp session or the session dragged.  This is especially helpful if you've got an entire level/story arc/etcetera planned out and you know that the next spell level will bypass or make the adventure too easy; 3rd and 6th level spells always seem to cause a shift in play style. 

Don't feel bad about holding that level back.  You can always throw in a slight more useful item, or let them level up a bit quicker next time. 

LOL - OK, I just realized you're the original "I screw with my Players' progression, for my own convenience, so I don't have to adjust my story" guy, in this thread.

Never mind.

I am in the process of running Waterdeep: Dragon Heist and it took around four sessions, each being one and a half hours, for the characters to get to level 2 because I used the milestone system assigned in the adventure. I will say that we all felt it was taking far too long for them to level. Makes sense as we were playing once a week, so a month to hit level 2 seems a bit extreme. However, if I moved them up earlier, they would have plowed through the battles even faster then they were! 

It was a tough call, but I stuck to the adventure and let it play out. The players were absolutely thrilled when they leveled and so far all is well. I do like milestone for the ease of it, but I get the player frustration with it as well. 

But not the way everyone has been taking it.  I'm DMing for is a group of adults where everyone has jobs, spouse, kids, etc. which mean that about 20% of the time one of the players isn't going to be able to make it to the game.  Instead of canceling or punishing that person because life happened and they don't get XP, we went milestone.  That way if 2 people are out we still play, but it may not advance the story much (minor encounters, exploration, side quests, etc.) but the main story line doesn't really advance.  Those minor rewards, are usually game specific -like saving an inn therefore those characters stay for free or reduced prices on some equipment from a smith, free access to a magical library, a favor from a noble, contacts, basically something that isn't game breaking. 

But, with all that said, the original question was how to manage a campaign with milestone instead of XP.  Milestone is much easier from a DM perspective, and if everyone agrees, removes the tracking of fiddley bits and lets the game keep moving.

I think it also depends on what kind of DM you are. If you are a "by the book" DM, or if you played several of the older editions, milestone progression was not really a thing. (Though I had DM's that had just leveled people when he felt they should) If you are newer to it, milestone is an easy way to help you learn other things before worrying about that. 

In the LMoP the adventure is set up to purposely introduce DM's to both aspects. The whole idea is to give the DM their choice of how to handle it. Where as Dragon Heist specifically used milestone for the first chapter, and essentially the second as well. 

Point is, there is no right or wrong way. The golden rule is that everyone has fun. If your group needs to see XP progress, then by all means. If they are ok just leveling based on the DM's knowledge, thats ok too. There is nothing right or wrong with using either system.  

Thanks guys for all the inputs. It have given me a more clearer view on milestones and classic xp. It really has helped me do get a more clearer view on how me and my group will probably go toward.

@Shadowblade25: yup totally agree, it all comes down to have fun in the group and create a wonderful story.

It was ages when I played and even DM D&D, back in the 80s with AD&D and of course the red and blue box when it came out in Swedish. Back then I think the whole xp was easy. But later on I went from that type of development through others forms, still sort of exp like it was with oWoD and nWnoD, and CoC etc. Still we created our own ways how exp would be dealt with, so it worked for us. Now coming back to D&D 5E its like opening the book for the first time again :) A lovely feeling. 

Sounds like you're making the rules and game work for you Tiharet. It's really what always attracted me to the game too. The story telling rather than the rules. This is why the MIlestone/Story BAsed Advancement suits me and my game better. Too many rules, charts and limitations ruin the game for me. There are plenty of other games for that imho.

Sounds like you have been playing as long as I so you're likely to make up your own idea about things to suit your game. Good on you. Too many people feel their way is the only way and feel personally affronted when people dare to have an opposing view. You don't seem one of them.

Good luck and I'm glad you've found that magic again.

As an irrelevant side note - I'm rather bemused by the constant self congratulatory references people keep making to how long they've been playing. I've run across horrible DMs with decades of experience - and I've seen new DMs that ran a really good table. I've never seen what value "time served" imparted.

Quote from Vedexent >>

As an irrelevant side note - I'm rather bemused by the constant self congratulatory references people keep making to how long they've been playing. I've run across horrible DMs with decades of experience - and I've seen new DMs that ran a really good table. I've never seen what value "time served" imparted.

 That's what we've been suggesting all along - Experience is a terrible way to level up people! ;p

What a ridiculous thing to say! Experience is a worthless measure!? So you're suggesting you do something once and you'll never improve from there? Why not give the CEO job to the intern then? The bus keys to a learning driver? What about the infant children of a household make all the decisions for the whole family? Of course experience matters!!! Everyone learns and improves the more they do something.

If you have DM'ed and/or played for a longer period of time you improve your knowledge base, your understanding of what works and what doesn't,  how you create a character/encounter/setting. I started DMing when I was 12 and I'm certainly a much better DM 30+ years later. There are always exceptions to any rule, but experience is a strong measure of leadership and improvement in any workplace, any activity, any historical community.

In the end play your game your way and leave the rest of us, who just want to play D&D for fun, to make up our own minds about how we'd like to play. In the end, I come on to threads like this to share ideas and learn from others - you know, add to my experience.

Anyway, Yes you are completely right. We should all just follow your lead and just use XP (even though it takes far more time to calculate, attribute to non combat related encounters and make players only motivated to act if they are somehow rewarded with XP) so you can stop arguing now. Congratulations - i can't take you seriously