About- combat XP - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

About- combat XP

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
zombiegleemax
Nov 09, 2003 13:39:08 Being DM for many years, i tried to be as fair as possible with Xp atrribution. And i really dislike the way of sharing xp as it is mentionned in DMG.
I can't accept the fact that in group of 4 adventurers two of them nearly make all the job in an encounter and to split 25% to each one at the end.
But it was hard to estimate the degree of participation in an encounter. So my players wrote all the damage they do, and i make a ratio at the end of a session. THey tell me 25hp of skeletons, 35 of orcs etc etc, and i calculate it for each one.
I also give Xp/spell level (10/spell lvl) ( when useful of course) to balance the game for spell caster, and xp for every intellignet use of skills.
I would also say that combat/action Xp represents 75% and roleplay the others 25% (depending of the session of course).

But i would like to know your way of dispatching and counting xp, if any of you use grid (i made that before) etc etc.. Thanks ;)
#2
Argon
Nov 09, 2003 16:50:21 I'm on the opposite end of your theory. I think XP is 75% roleplaying and only 25% combat. In almost every scenario. I don't believe in awarding large amounts of xp because a player happened to get a good roll on the dice. Instead I prefer what did the characters uncover how was a situation handled, what clues or herrings did a character pick up on.

In combat did they charge ahead with reckless abandon and get lucky or did they compliment each other with great planning. All this comes into play.

Of course each character and character class have their strengths and weaknesses. When it comes to deciphering thing's or coming up with theories rouge's, priest's and wizards are at their best. Strategic planning for combat is great for warrior's, some priest's, and in some case's rouge's. When it comes to deciphering magical theories, beasts, or weaknesses an person, place, or thing might have to magic. Wizards shine here, with some priest's and to some extent rouge's.

Other factor's would be based on race. But their's too many to detail for you. Warrior's get 10 xp per/lvl or HD of creature defeated in combat plus the split if applicapable. ( If all the characters played their parts in the encounter no matter how little the split should be even.) If a character has a good idea which helps the PC's overcome an encounterthen the XP bonus for that PC should be any where from 100 to 500 xp reward. Not that it can't be lower or higher but this is a guideline. I like your spelll formula so it works fine to me but you should remember my above statement as well. The successful use of an ability for any class should only be rewarded if the action is performed under duress. A Rouge character who climbs a wall or tree just to get a better look is not worth an xp reward. If a character has a good idea xp rewards should range from 50-200 xp reward. Also good roleplaying should be rewarded as well. If you have a character that tries and find out clues, ideas, and follows up on them while trying to get the party involved, this doesn't mean come on your character has to roll higher on attack's. Then a xp reward from as little as 50 to 300 xp reward. This may also be higher if the characters plays a disadvantage which is consistent with the feel of the character just for role playing sake. Such as ignoreing what is said in a language he does not know because his character does not understand it and then he walks into a trap that the player understood but not the character then his roleplaying xp be be higher.

This is some of my guidelines, they are not canon made rules. But I think they should be. I hope this helps you in your rewarding of experience for your characters.
#3
zombiegleemax
Nov 09, 2003 21:12:11 Firstly, this thread is more appropriate to the general D&D forum as it has zero to do with Greyhawk.

Secondly, your system is very unfair and will promote hack'n'slash play. If you like and want to promote more fighters and a hack'n'slash style, then I suppose your system is good, but for general roleplaying and gaming, it's unfair.

The reason the 3rd ed. went the way of dividing XP equally, was because the task of determining who gets what because of what they did and how they did it, was both very subjective (and therefore unfair) and time-consuming.

How can you measure accurately the benefit of a +1 to hit in combat, on all allies? At the end of the day, unless you're some math genius, it's very difficult to quantify just how effective a Bless spell is or how it affects the overall outcome of a combat encounter. Is it 5% of all hits? Is it all hits that passed by one? What about criticals where the better a chance of hitting also affects the roll to determine if a threat is a critical?

Then there's also the simple matter of back-up and support. Is a fighter going to be as aggressive and determined if he hasn't got a cleric at his back in case he goes down? What about the bard with a bow who rarely gets into melee but manages to pick off a dozen kobolds before they're in melee range... would he sit and wait for them to get into melee range if it weren't for his buddies beside him?

At the end of the day, it all shouldn't matter. As long as everyone is contributing in some way, shape or form, then the division of XP in a combat encounter should be equal, because everyone participated, everyone put their character's lives on the line, and if everyone hadn't, who knows what the outcome would have been.

One way I suggest you counter this 'problem' in your games, is to teach yourself to assign CR's to everything, not just combat encounters. For instance, let's say that getting the bartender to cough up some pertinant information without resorting to violence is of paramount importance to the overall game. So you assign a CR of say... 2 or 3 to the scenario, thus awarding roleplaying XP if the group succeed in getting the info they require.

Then there is also mission XP and various goal XP. Once a group gets to a certain stage in an adventure where it's clear that it is a 'chapter' and that the next stage is about to begin, then they should get a group XP award for getting to that stage.

Not all XP should be combat XP.
#4
samwise
Nov 09, 2003 21:28:55 First, I agree with Delglath's first two points.

As for myself, I have, as I did with AD&D and 2nd ed., abandoned the use of charts or tables for awarding xp. When I feel the campaign needs to move along, I inform the players that they have levelled.
#5
zombiegleemax
Nov 09, 2003 21:34:51
Originally posted by Samwise
First, I agree with Delglath's first two points.

Can you smell smoke?

Originally posted by Samwise
As for myself, I have, as I did with AD&D and 2nd ed., abandoned the use of charts or tables for awarding xp. When I feel the campaign needs to move along, I inform the players that they have levelled.

I tried that once and almost got lynched by my players! They all wanted XP. I've come to the conclusion that part of the fun of the game is getting rewards, whether XP or items or in-game, RP benefits.
#6
samwise
Nov 09, 2003 21:53:35
Originally posted by Delglath
I tried that once and almost got lynched by my players! They all wanted XP. I've come to the conclusion that part of the fun of the game is getting rewards, whether XP or items or in-game, RP benefits.

They do get XP. Just not at the rate listed in some book. Or at the time listed in the book.
#7
Argon
Nov 09, 2003 23:40:08 Well folowing my guidelines above. i also wait until my PC's have advanced to a certain stage in my campaign before rewarding xp. I just wanted to give Makoma something to go by in his rewarding of xp.

Might I add that so far out of three posters on this thread we all basically agree on how to award experience. So why we all have different styles experience is handled similar in all our campaigns (Samwise, Delglath, Argon).

Samwise one thing I have done though is when xp rewards lag for a while, I might throw a proficiency to a player for free because they have come across a situation so often that they have gained some knowledge in this proficiency. I'm going by a 2e version I think this might be skills in 3e. Just a thought for your campaign though.
#8
samwise
Nov 09, 2003 23:47:33 The 3E/3.5 rule books specifically caution against the awarding of skill ranks or feats for balance purposes.
Naturally, that means I have awarded skill ranks for certain acts by the players. These were all linked to certain actions that were well beyond the scope of the encounter that I had planned, and involved one or more of exceptional role-playing, enabling a plot or new sub-plot that advanced the campaign, showed superior deductive ability or insight, or amused the heck out of me and the other players.
And that said, I would very much caution against the wholesale awarding of such, particularly feats. Indeed, while I have given out a few skill ranks, I don't think I would ever extend it to feats. At most, I'd make a new feat available, but that is it.
#9
zombiegleemax
Nov 10, 2003 4:14:22 First thank you all for your answers.
Second, i would like to say that i wrote combat/ACTION represents 75%, by actions i meant everything that involve physical movement, not hack and slash. the 25% of roleplay are pure roleplay based.
Also, i would say it's very quick tocalculate, and players are very happy at the end of the session to make their"hp's total", it's a kind of treasure. They'are proud to realize concretelly what they have done, i can swear you they prefere this way.
Of course, they know a flesh to stone or a diplomacy or anything else will waard them the same quantity of xp, it this way i am agree with the Delgath's idea way of giving CR to lot of things.
You may think that damage related award is not fair (i give no killpoint, no ;))) , but it(s close to videogame system, and it's also more unfair to divide equally iMHO.
#10
zombiegleemax
Nov 10, 2003 5:03:21 A last thing to add, when i wrote that's it's unfair to divide equally, i mean it's unfair by practice, even if it's fair in theory.
You necevr experienced coward characters who stay behind and let the others fight, and even die? i cannot accept to reward them at every encounter.
I won't force them to act, but i wan't them to realize when they hear Xp attribution that they are not meritant. Adventurer should be a risky job. The supreme paradox is the 1st lvl who accompagn 4 lvl party, stay behind and is cured by 4th lvl cleric, have all the benefit, and earn 1lvl at each sesion? no no.. i can't stand. That's because of so much pradox that i turned to damage related xp, WITH SPELL XP also ;)
And at least, i don't also like uniformity, it's not funny to earn the same amount of xp for each players. My players like to say "Wow, with the fight you nearly deal alone with the troll, you gonna earn a lot", or , to a rogue char "wow, with everything you loot in the pelor's temple when we were sleeping at the inn, you gonna earn lot of xp!! but i gonna kill you if you don't put everything back"- add the pelor paladin..;) but that's another story.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 zombiegleemax Nov 09, 2003 13:39:08	Being DM for many years, i tried to be as fair as possible with Xp atrribution. And i really dislike the way of sharing xp as it is mentionned in DMG. I can't accept the fact that in group of 4 adventurers two of them nearly make all the job in an encounter and to split 25% to each one at the end. But it was hard to estimate the degree of participation in an encounter. So my players wrote all the damage they do, and i make a ratio at the end of a session. THey tell me 25hp of skeletons, 35 of orcs etc etc, and i calculate it for each one. I also give Xp/spell level (10/spell lvl) ( when useful of course) to balance the game for spell caster, and xp for every intellignet use of skills. I would also say that combat/action Xp represents 75% and roleplay the others 25% (depending of the session of course). But i would like to know your way of dispatching and counting xp, if any of you use grid (i made that before) etc etc.. Thanks ;)
#2 Argon Nov 09, 2003 16:50:21	I'm on the opposite end of your theory. I think XP is 75% roleplaying and only 25% combat. In almost every scenario. I don't believe in awarding large amounts of xp because a player happened to get a good roll on the dice. Instead I prefer what did the characters uncover how was a situation handled, what clues or herrings did a character pick up on. In combat did they charge ahead with reckless abandon and get lucky or did they compliment each other with great planning. All this comes into play. Of course each character and character class have their strengths and weaknesses. When it comes to deciphering thing's or coming up with theories rouge's, priest's and wizards are at their best. Strategic planning for combat is great for warrior's, some priest's, and in some case's rouge's. When it comes to deciphering magical theories, beasts, or weaknesses an person, place, or thing might have to magic. Wizards shine here, with some priest's and to some extent rouge's. Other factor's would be based on race. But their's too many to detail for you. Warrior's get 10 xp per/lvl or HD of creature defeated in combat plus the split if applicapable. ( If all the characters played their parts in the encounter no matter how little the split should be even.) If a character has a good idea which helps the PC's overcome an encounterthen the XP bonus for that PC should be any where from 100 to 500 xp reward. Not that it can't be lower or higher but this is a guideline. I like your spelll formula so it works fine to me but you should remember my above statement as well. The successful use of an ability for any class should only be rewarded if the action is performed under duress. A Rouge character who climbs a wall or tree just to get a better look is not worth an xp reward. If a character has a good idea xp rewards should range from 50-200 xp reward. Also good roleplaying should be rewarded as well. If you have a character that tries and find out clues, ideas, and follows up on them while trying to get the party involved, this doesn't mean come on your character has to roll higher on attack's. Then a xp reward from as little as 50 to 300 xp reward. This may also be higher if the characters plays a disadvantage which is consistent with the feel of the character just for role playing sake. Such as ignoreing what is said in a language he does not know because his character does not understand it and then he walks into a trap that the player understood but not the character then his roleplaying xp be be higher. This is some of my guidelines, they are not canon made rules. But I think they should be. I hope this helps you in your rewarding of experience for your characters.
#3 zombiegleemax Nov 09, 2003 21:12:11	Firstly, this thread is more appropriate to the general D&D forum as it has zero to do with Greyhawk. Secondly, your system is very unfair and will promote hack'n'slash play. If you like and want to promote more fighters and a hack'n'slash style, then I suppose your system is good, but for general roleplaying and gaming, it's unfair. The reason the 3rd ed. went the way of dividing XP equally, was because the task of determining who gets what because of what they did and how they did it, was both very subjective (and therefore unfair) and time-consuming. How can you measure accurately the benefit of a +1 to hit in combat, on all allies? At the end of the day, unless you're some math genius, it's very difficult to quantify just how effective a Bless spell is or how it affects the overall outcome of a combat encounter. Is it 5% of all hits? Is it all hits that passed by one? What about criticals where the better a chance of hitting also affects the roll to determine if a threat is a critical? Then there's also the simple matter of back-up and support. Is a fighter going to be as aggressive and determined if he hasn't got a cleric at his back in case he goes down? What about the bard with a bow who rarely gets into melee but manages to pick off a dozen kobolds before they're in melee range... would he sit and wait for them to get into melee range if it weren't for his buddies beside him? At the end of the day, it all shouldn't matter. As long as everyone is contributing in some way, shape or form, then the division of XP in a combat encounter should be equal, because everyone participated, everyone put their character's lives on the line, and if everyone hadn't, who knows what the outcome would have been. One way I suggest you counter this 'problem' in your games, is to teach yourself to assign CR's to everything, not just combat encounters. For instance, let's say that getting the bartender to cough up some pertinant information without resorting to violence is of paramount importance to the overall game. So you assign a CR of say... 2 or 3 to the scenario, thus awarding roleplaying XP if the group succeed in getting the info they require. Then there is also mission XP and various goal XP. Once a group gets to a certain stage in an adventure where it's clear that it is a 'chapter' and that the next stage is about to begin, then they should get a group XP award for getting to that stage. Not all XP should be combat XP.
#4 samwise Nov 09, 2003 21:28:55	First, I agree with Delglath's first two points. As for myself, I have, as I did with AD&D and 2nd ed., abandoned the use of charts or tables for awarding xp. When I feel the campaign needs to move along, I inform the players that they have levelled.
#5 zombiegleemax Nov 09, 2003 21:34:51	Originally posted by Samwise First, I agree with Delglath's first two points. Can you smell smoke? Originally posted by Samwise As for myself, I have, as I did with AD&D and 2nd ed., abandoned the use of charts or tables for awarding xp. When I feel the campaign needs to move along, I inform the players that they have levelled. I tried that once and almost got lynched by my players! They all wanted XP. I've come to the conclusion that part of the fun of the game is getting rewards, whether XP or items or in-game, RP benefits.
#6 samwise Nov 09, 2003 21:53:35	Originally posted by Delglath I tried that once and almost got lynched by my players! They all wanted XP. I've come to the conclusion that part of the fun of the game is getting rewards, whether XP or items or in-game, RP benefits. They do get XP. Just not at the rate listed in some book. Or at the time listed in the book.
#7 Argon Nov 09, 2003 23:40:08	Well folowing my guidelines above. i also wait until my PC's have advanced to a certain stage in my campaign before rewarding xp. I just wanted to give Makoma something to go by in his rewarding of xp. Might I add that so far out of three posters on this thread we all basically agree on how to award experience. So why we all have different styles experience is handled similar in all our campaigns (Samwise, Delglath, Argon). Samwise one thing I have done though is when xp rewards lag for a while, I might throw a proficiency to a player for free because they have come across a situation so often that they have gained some knowledge in this proficiency. I'm going by a 2e version I think this might be skills in 3e. Just a thought for your campaign though.
#8 samwise Nov 09, 2003 23:47:33	The 3E/3.5 rule books specifically caution against the awarding of skill ranks or feats for balance purposes. Naturally, that means I have awarded skill ranks for certain acts by the players. These were all linked to certain actions that were well beyond the scope of the encounter that I had planned, and involved one or more of exceptional role-playing, enabling a plot or new sub-plot that advanced the campaign, showed superior deductive ability or insight, or amused the heck out of me and the other players. And that said, I would very much caution against the wholesale awarding of such, particularly feats. Indeed, while I have given out a few skill ranks, I don't think I would ever extend it to feats. At most, I'd make a new feat available, but that is it.
#9 zombiegleemax Nov 10, 2003 4:14:22	First thank you all for your answers. Second, i would like to say that i wrote combat/ACTION represents 75%, by actions i meant everything that involve physical movement, not hack and slash. the 25% of roleplay are pure roleplay based. Also, i would say it's very quick tocalculate, and players are very happy at the end of the session to make their"hp's total", it's a kind of treasure. They'are proud to realize concretelly what they have done, i can swear you they prefere this way. Of course, they know a flesh to stone or a diplomacy or anything else will waard them the same quantity of xp, it this way i am agree with the Delgath's idea way of giving CR to lot of things. You may think that damage related award is not fair (i give no killpoint, no ;))) , but it(s close to videogame system, and it's also more unfair to divide equally iMHO.
#10 zombiegleemax Nov 10, 2003 5:03:21	A last thing to add, when i wrote that's it's unfair to divide equally, i mean it's unfair by practice, even if it's fair in theory. You necevr experienced coward characters who stay behind and let the others fight, and even die? i cannot accept to reward them at every encounter. I won't force them to act, but i wan't them to realize when they hear Xp attribution that they are not meritant. Adventurer should be a risky job. The supreme paradox is the 1st lvl who accompagn 4 lvl party, stay behind and is cured by 4th lvl cleric, have all the benefit, and earn 1lvl at each sesion? no no.. i can't stand. That's because of so much pradox that i turned to damage related xp, WITH SPELL XP also ;) And at least, i don't also like uniformity, it's not funny to earn the same amount of xp for each players. My players like to say "Wow, with the fight you nearly deal alone with the troll, you gonna earn a lot", or , to a rogue char "wow, with everything you loot in the pelor's temple when we were sleeping at the inn, you gonna earn lot of xp!! but i gonna kill you if you don't put everything back"- add the pelor paladin..;) but that's another story.