How do you prefer to earn/award XPs?

[JRR_Talking]

being an avid dragonquest player i like to give xp as an hourly rate

If u r doing an adventure equivalent to your power level u earn X xp per hour. This way a 4 hour killing spree earns as much as a 4 hour chat-interaction session, assuming both push the 'story' along as much.

This way you can give xp, and therefore levels, at a rate you wish, and the players know approx what each session will yield. . So in D&D its easy to stick to the level every 13 hours played ideal for example.

So earn 75xp per hour at 1st, 150xp at 2nd , 230xp at 3rd, etc. Give + or - 10% or so for excellent/nightmare sessions.

John

 

[FireLance]

Another vote for forget XP, level up when the DM says so, or at whatever milestones that the group has agreed to (once per X sessions, for example).

Mind you, this only works if the players and the DM are pretty much on the same page with respect to the preferred rate of advancement.

Otherwise, an objective system of awarding XP (e.g. based on the CR of creatures defeated in combat) may be preferable.

 

[EricNoah]

Other. I don't use XP, I just tell the players when to level up.

 

[Psion]

Other.

Set rate/hour + bonus for meeting goals, roleplaying, clever play, or otherwise making for a good play.

I have not use the CR-XP table for some time.

 

[Kheti sa-Menik]

I give normal XP as per the books for traps/combat (although I don't use a lot of traps).
I give XP for little player-interactive things...writing up a background, participating in out of session (email) roleplaying, accomplishing goals, reaching a logical "chapter" end, exceptional roleplaying, plus GM Fiat. GM Fiat includes if the PCs are close to levelling and I don't want to throw a meaningless encounter just to provide XP but I want them at the higher level, if I thought a particular player did well over time, etc.
I also tend to give more XP if a player continuously plays the same PC. I find a constant rotating cast of characters messes with storylines, continuity, and vermissilitude. This doesn't manifest itself so much as an XP penalty as just having the new PC start at a lower level than the others.

 

[Li Shenron]

As a player I voted 30% combat - 70% noncombat.

Just because choosing to fight seems to be always the most obvious choice, particularly since there is an odd cultural thing with lots of players pretending that every combat be "appropriate" (meaning, winnable with less than an extraordinary effort).

I think I would enjoy an xp system where combat is usually an ok choice, but rarely the absolute best, and perhaps making the xp from combat minoritarian could be a way to achieve that.

I prefer to not earn/award XPs for anything to do with in-game events. I'd much rather that XPs be awarded to keep the party advancing at a speed the DM is comfortable with. That also, in my estimation and experience, frees players up to have their PCs do precisely what they think they should in any given situation without worrying about whether it would earn them XP and how much.

In fact, I'd rather just drop XP and have PCs advance a level every few sessions.

As a DM I often feel like that. I tried to use an xp-free advancement rules, and it seemed to work fine (although in 3ed it requires some extra house rules because several things require xp expenditure), but unfortunately it was my players who didn't like it and wanted the game revert to the normal xp-based advancement. :\

 

[Rothe]

Other: I award xp for overcoming challenges. Combat and traps (life & death ones) are easy. But just as much or more xp for bypassing, parley, overcoming a social challenge, fulfilling a goal, as for killing. We've also agreed we all like heroic high adventure so rescueing folks for example gives xp. No xp for "stuff": gp, magic items, the xp comes in whatever you had to do to get them. What % really depends on the session.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

The percentages don't matter much to me as long as it is not 100% combat oriented. I want some story/goal based XP, but none from treasure since treasure is a reward in its own right. How much the distribution should be can vary with the type of campaign. In a combat-focused campaign, I exepct the combat to be a higher percentage. In a more social challenge/story based campaign I would expect it those challenges to be a higher percentage.

 

[sniffles]

I decided to vote "Other".

I don't like focusing all the emphasis on combat. I'm in the game to roleplay, too. But it's difficult to assess the XP worth of roleplaying.

I also think it's somewhat unfair to do it that way because it may penalize players who aren't as good at roleplaying or don't feel as comfortable with it - and we all have bad days where we're just not "on game".

Actually, I prefer the GM not tell me how he determines XP. Just tell me when it's time to level up.

 

[palleomortis]

Other for me. It all differs. I like to award it for anything that makes a game interesting or moves it along, so long as it's justifiable. I.E., if the player does not fight at all, but plays heavily into his character, interactes greatly with the surrounds, I give xp. If a player fights constantly in combat merely to gain xp, i slowly award less and less, to the point were he looses the idea of combat=xp. I don't really know anyone that's ever said, "Naw, let's not level up, I just don't want to." So i try to constantly and approprietly award points to let them level, but never too much that the game gets out of hand, that happens without my help .