D&D 5E Poll: Experience, Leveling, and Groups

[Grydan]

I'm in the camp that says that playing is its own reward, and not-playing its own punishment.

I feel no need to further compound either by not awarding XP to those who are unable to make it.

If someone can't make it because something more important came up, well, then it's silly to expect them to show, and silly to punish them for doing something more important.

If someone can't make it because they're a bit of a deadbeat who doesn't keep their commitments, well, it's kinda silly to play with them in the first place, isn't it?

I don't know. Your mileage may vary, etc.

I've gone back and forth on XP several times. The current model I use is as a pacing mechanic for levelling, but even there I'll readily ignore it if the story at hand suggests an earlier or later level-up.

Treasure, both in terms of magical items and GP? Dividing it is the party's bailiwick, not the DM's, as far as I'm concerned. I give them what I give them, and if they want to withhold treasure from non-attendees, that's for them to figure out. Given that it's of benefit to the party for everyone to be kept up to a decent level of equipment and supplies, they generally choose not to punish anyone.

 

[GreyICE]

If there's someone who can infrequently make it, but is actually interested (perhaps their work schedule is such that they are never quite sure when they're free, etc.) why not give them a character who supports that? Make them a wandering adventurer who keeps stumbling across the party and aiding them, then deciding "enough is enough" at the oddest times and wandering off.

There's quite a few characters like this in fiction, and the best part is you have the perfect excuse to keep them on-level in XP and items without them impacting the core party's economy (they were doing other things, that's how they got this nifty piece of magic!)

 

[the Jester]

Every group's style is different on this.

My preference is for "gain xp when your pc participates". Which usually means you, the player, are there; but sometimes there are exceptions (your pc is run as an npc for a session? You get xp; also, quests that you had a hand in but are finished while you aren't there? You get xp).

 

[Jester David]

Two Questions:

1) Should the reason for their absence have any effect on whether or not they get experience?
There's a difference between mother in the hospital, double-book with a pub crawl, and just forgot as excuses.

2) Levelling everyone as a group removes the ability to reward creative thinking, role-playing, good behaviour, and the like with experience. Should alternative rewards be in the game? Either as part of the core rules or as a module.

 

[Lanefan]

Voted "after the session..." but actual vote would be "awarded whenever the DM gets around to adding them up". I usually give 'em out every 3-5 sessions unless I know someone's close to bumping, in which case I'll do it more often.

Individual XP awards - you* take part in something worth XP, you* get a share of said XP. You* don't participate, then no XP.

Each character levels up whenever its XP total says it should, without care as to whether it's at the same time as any other character.

Absent players leave their characters at the mercy of those who do show up, though if the absence is known ahead of time the player can give instructions which will be at least vaguely followed depending on circumstance. Otherwise the character(s) of a missing player are fully part of the party, and subject to the same risk and reward as the rest.

* - you as character. XP are a character reward, not a player reward. A character can earn XP without having a player attached.

Lanefan

 

[Obryn]

Two Questions:

1) Should the reason for their absence have any effect on whether or not they get experience?
There's a difference between mother in the hospital, double-book with a pub crawl, and just forgot as excuses.

I'm not their boss. I'm their friend. It's not my place to judge their reasons for not being at the game.

2) Levelling everyone as a group removes the ability to reward creative thinking, role-playing, good behaviour, and the like with experience. Should alternative rewards be in the game? Either as part of the core rules or as a module.

No it doesn't. Those things are rewarded amply already by (1) working really well in the game, (2) getting approval from peers, and (3) making the game session even more awesome.

I used to give out XP as extra awesome-chips. I don't now. My players are still just as awesome.

-O

 

[Grimmjow]

depends on how the group plays. If the group likes to spread itself out and try different things at different times, giving them XP at different times (meaning leveling up at different times) would be a find thing to do.

I hope this is fine to do. The problem though would be if it doesn't support different levels of play (which it should) is when the group got back together.

 

[Libramarian]

The player who missed the session was already punished - they missed the session.

If that's not enough punishment, then the player isn't engaged with the campaign.

Withholding XP from players who miss a session is not about punishing their behavior. I think if you want to change someone's behavior then talking to them about it outside the game would be a better way to do that. It's about recognizing the achievements of the players who showed up and kicked ass.

(I would be amenable to the idea of one of the attending players taking on the absent player's PC, and having them earn XP that way. But it shouldn't be guaranteed.)

Are their achievements already awesome without needing to be recognized with more XP? Yeah. But doing so makes them MORE awesome.

I don't subscribe to this general idea that some amount of fun is "good enough" and after that point it's all about reducing frustration. I think the fun parts should be made even more fun and the frustrating parts can sometimes be useful as contrast.

I think KamikazeMidget once said, or had in his sig maybe, that he wants D&D to make players go from highs to lows more often (YEAH! to ARGH!). I agree with that basically.

 

[Mallus]

And if everyone misses at the same frequency, doesn't it even out in the long run?

The way I look at it, if things even out in the end, why not even them out from the start? Seems simpler that way.

In my past two campaigns (3e & 4e) I used group XP -- just making some number up that sounded good. Everyone, including new and replacement/alternate PC, had the same total. I didn't just hand out levels, but I might as well have. I guess I still have affection for arbitrarily-assigned values.

For my current AD&D game, I tally every GP of treasure and HP of defeated foe, then divide it evenly between the PCs, present and not. Why do I bother? Nostalgia, mainly, plus an interest in seeing how quickly PCs gain levels from looting the classic AD&D modules, plus random encounters generated from the DMG.

 

[Mallus]

It's about recognizing the achievements of the players who showed up and kicked ass.

Players achieve nothing of worth around the gaming table --or virtually equivalent thereof-- outside of having fun, and fun is it's own reward.

The way I see it, you miss a session and you miss out on a good time. I don't need to make your in-game avatar slightly less capable, too.