Do You Use XP

[Ahnehnois]

I used to feel the same way about XP as a tool for encouraging certain activities. Then I came to understand that the "Casual Gamer" in the group, who hated being thrust into the spotlight, was never going to change his personality because of how I handed out XP. Instead he was simply going to fall behind the rest of the group by not playing in such a way as to gather maximum XP. And that was alienating him even more and the guy was a good friend so why was I doing that?

I also dropped the notion of missing out on XP for missing the game session because people almost never miss our games because they'd rather be doing something else. They miss our games because they are required to do something else. So they are already being penalized by not being there and there's really no point in me trying to encourage good attendance. If there is any possible way for them to be gaming then they will be there.

I'm not saying that people who give out XP for those reasons are "doing it wrong". But I simply came to understand that it was providing no benefit to our group.

This matches with my experience. It felt like I was pushing certain players who weren't comfortable with being pushed. That's one of the reasons I dropped XP; it felt like a punishment as well as a reward.

 

[Mercurius]

When I started my 4E campaign a couple years ago, I played the RAW. Then at some point I threw XP out and just leveled up the PCs when it seemed to make sense. But I found something to be missing with that approach so we went back to the RAW (with added XP bonuses at my discretion).

XP are fun. It is easier and makes more sense to level up when the DM feels like it is appropriate, but like many D&Disms I find it more fun to go the way that makes less sense.

 

[Slander]

When we started our 3.5 campaign 3 years ago, I was very meticulous about handing out individual XP and keeping an updated log for everyone. But I noticed that the group was falling behind the levels expected for the AP we are playing. I ended up awarding more XP than I might otherwise have for various things to keep them close to the expected level.

Within the past year, I've stopped posting XP all together. I basically try to level everyone up every 6 weeks (4-5 games) or as the story permits. No one from my group has brought it up, so I'm sticking with it.

 

[howandwhy99]

I love XP as an expression of PC experience by class. I think of it as a barometer on how well they are doing in their goal to improve their fighting or magic using, etc. I like it that I don't have to level, if I don't want to. It only comes from working at it. Like getting stronger. I can stay the same strength now, improve, or decline based on my actions.

 

[TerraDave]

I will generally use XP "by the book" for a while with a new edition, then stop doing so at some point, but still give it out.

The group gets it for broad overall progress, basically a number depending on their level and acomplishment per session, that I tweak up or down.

I do also give it out for showing up and playing. This is not to punish those that miss a session, but to reward those that show up.

I don't give out individual charecter based XP. And in general I don't like "bennies" for good behaviour too much. If there is a real issue, probably a metagame one, then I will just talk with the player. Otherwise, let people play like they want to play, and let good play be its own reward.

 

[MACLARREN]

We no longer track xp. For that matter, we have taken what we believe to be the best parts of Trailblazer, 3.5, Conan, 4e, and PF and devised our own rule set. It works for us. Tracking xp's and DM prep for campaigns is a pain. Therefore, the system we use now is pretty basic and and allows a DM to plot a campaign and know where the players are to have things ready. We implemented a "tick system" to do it. Basically, after any point at which the DM feels we earn a "tick" we get it to see our progression. It takes 5 ticks to level up. It works well for us and eliminates frustration of planning etc. Saves time and moves game along quickly.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Seems like there's a pretty good spread on this. The plurality have gone for ignoring XP, but XP as written is close behind and the number of revisionists out there is not insignificant.

Pretty much what I was expecting.

 

[Hautamaki]

I like to award XP the way most video games do: every monster has their own exp award, and monsters killed, captured, or otherwise overcome, give the players that flat reward; divided equally among the number of PCs. Of course, monsters in different situations may be easier or harder to overcome: if you sneak up on the bandits you're going to kill them way more easily than if they sneaked up on you. But that's not a problem at all: it rewards smart play. Players get the same xp reward regardless of how difficult the fight was for them. If they had played more smartly, they might have had a much easier time with those monsters, and thus obtained the same rewards for less costs incurred.

I ignore the 'CR' system of calculating XP too. It's a needless layer of math. Bottom line is that in my game a Goblin Warrior with a spear and buckler gives you 20 exp, whether you are level 1 or 15. The difference is, 20 exp means a lot more to a level 1 character who only needs 2000 exp to advance than it does to a level 15 character who needs thousands upon thousands more.

I also reward quest exp, which encourages players to bypass or avoid fights with monsters if they feel they are running low on resources and just need to complete the quest. This way, the actual questing is a sort of complex decision-making process where characters will constantly be weighing the potential benefits of clearing another room of monsters vs simply moving on to the main objective of the quest.

The goal in any game is to always give players interesting choices and I feel the XP system, properly handled, is a great tool for doing that.

 

[bouncyhead]

Running my first AP pretty much killed off XP as written for me. When you are being told that characters 'should now be x level', you might as well just make it so.

In our current game the GM is using RAW though and I still get a mild buzz from the accumulative process.

 

[Grydan]

I've gone back and forth. I DM a 4E campaign, and we've been running through H1-H2-H3.

For H1, I followed the module: it calls out at certain points (being fairly linear), that the PC's probably will be levelling at this point or that. So, when they reached one of those points, I let them level up.

For H2, I decided to ignore XP, and simply have them level after finishing a chunk of the story. Unfortunately, the end result was that they spent a lot of time at one level, and very little at the next. I heard no complaints (nor had anyone complained about the way I ran H1, other than me...), but again decided that this wasn't the way that worked for me.

So for H3, I've gone back to the book. I don't bother telling the players the exact XP they've got, but instead (after discussing it with them) settled on telling them when they hit the half-way mark to the next level. At the rate we play, this gives them plenty of time to think about what changes they're making when they level up.

I've also been toying with ideas for a home-brew campaign, and haven't settled on how I'd do XP there. I'm somewhat tempted to just pick a level (probably something high-heroic), and keep the PC's set at that level. I'm not sure if I could sell my players on that, though. They sure seem to get a kick out of levelling up.