D&D 4E No Roleplaying XP in 4e

[Jhaelen]

As for myself, I'm making it even easier. No XP for monster killing, no XP for acting, no XP for overcoming skill challenges, and no Quest XP. After they managed to achieve their goal (whatever it might have been, doesn't matter if I as the GM handed it to them or the players simply chose to do another thing), they get to level up their character all together.

That's also a nice solution that I may have to try out one day.

There are 4 roles aren't there so if my striker is "striking" or my defender is "defending" then I am role playing & deserve my RP XP. I do not know why role playing has got so mixed up with overacting & attention hogging.

Well, these are only the combat roles. While some of this may boil over into a character's general behaviour (e.g. a defender being more protective of others) it's not meant to define a character's personality traits. It's probably the other way around: A character's background and personality traits explain a character's class choice.

Outside of combat is where most of the roleplaying happens (at least according to the understanding of roleplaying we have in my circle of acquaintances).

 

[pemerton]

It's probably the other way around: A character's background and personality traits explain a character's class choice.

A PC's background, personality and class are all specified in the real world by a player more-or-less simulataneously, and somewhat arbitrarily. So I don't know that it's possible to offer general speculation as to ingame cause-and-effect. Indeed, ingame, for some PCs, it may be that they didn't choose their way in the world at all but had it thrust upon them (this seems particularly plausible for paladins, clerics and at least some warlocks).

 

[Sir_Darien]

I've played and DMed games both with and without XP rewards in 2e, 3e, and 3.5. Here are a few of the reasons I like them:

-They help keep the group from responding to everything with a quip and to take the game more seriously. This keeps the game on topic and running smoothly.

-They give the players who do enjoy method acting and speaking in character a reason to do so.


Here are a few reasons I dislike them:

-They are very abstract. You can put in whatever system you like, but it still basically comes down to a DM judgement call. Since most DMs are not acting coaches, this creates a problem. I find it works much better if I "give" each player XP at the beginning of the night and take away a little every time they do something to be stupid or just act out of character. Then at the end of the night I actually give them whatever is left.

-Oftentimes they give an in-game reward for an out-of-game talent. Certain players are simply more social, vocal, and talented when it comes to roleplaying. Why should I reward them for this natural talent any more than I reward players based on how many free throws they can make in a minute. Penalizing people for acting stupid is one thing, rewarding them because they are better at speaking middle english is another.

Overall, I think that roleplaying XP is best left for games where EVERYONE in the group wants to play a very serious game in character. For dungeon-mashing groups it really doesn't make sense to implement it.

If, as a DM, you want to reward a specific player for helping keep the game focused and staying on topic, especially if he is a strong roleplayer, work some of his characters storyline into your game. Let his character have a pivotal role to play in your world. This will make him happier than any amount of XP, and the monster-bashers of the group won't feel like they are getting screwed out of XP.

My current group consists of 2 hardcore roleplayers, 2 guys who want to kill monsters and take its stuff, and one lurker who just seems to enjoy showing up. My last campaign went very well because its storyline revolved around the two roleplayers and I made sure the two others got some bada$$ gear. Basically DMs, just give your players what they want and your games are enjoyed by all.

Wow this post got preachy fast. Thats it for me.

-D

 

[VannATLC]

Advancing any one character above any other, in terms of XP, is almost always going to cause problems.

If you want to assign RP XP to the group, then distribute it, that is unlikely to cause the same problems.

I, however, have always preferred to distribute rewards OOC, at a more abstract Meta-game level (Re-rolls, etc) or ingame material goods.

I find the first rarely has an impact, and the other 2 help the group-as-a-whole.

I expect my players to stay true to their characters, and I have a 3 page template of characterisations, descriptions, and attributes they need to fill out, before we start a campaign.

 

[Cmarco]

Typically, I don't hand out roleplaying experience. I do, however, let the players vote at the end of the night as to who has earned the "good roleplaying" reward.

I attempted a few times to hand out free-hand roleplaying experience, but the PCs didn't like it, because they felt they all played it to the hilt... I much prefer players voting for a tangible reward that they can use.

 

[AtomicPope]

It's not that it lacks XP for role-playing. You get XP for skill-challenges (which involve heavy RP) and quests (which have RP elements) as well as combat (which ALSO has room for plenty of RP, I'm not sure why so many people think that it's either-or.)

It's that the DM isn't encouraged to award XP to his favorite method-actor at the table.

Fitz

Agree. A good DM doesn't play favorites. That's to say, there aren't a lot of good DM's.



I GM White Wolf games and there's Roleplaying Experience. In fact, more exp comes from roleplaying. Whenever I start the game I'll give max Roleplaying Exp, but after that all bets are off. At the end of every session I'll have the players talk out of character about their intentions, character development, etc. What they say will either confirm or make me reconsider the exp. Whenever I dole out any "performance" exp I'd rather give more than less. The problem I've noticed with giving people less Roleplaying Exp isn't that they complain, it's just that they take it personal.

At the same time I can't help thinking about the person who tries very hard to stay in character, be a positive player (not necessarily a "positive character"), and gives it their all. If you give everyone the same amount of exp then there's no incentive to try harder. It's sounds Draconian but it's really not bad at all. Once players start getting max Roleplaying Experience they feel they've accomplished something outside of killing a monster or solving a clue.

Varying experience totals is definitely for mature players only.

 

[AtomicPope]

Typically, I don't hand out roleplaying experience. I do, however, let the players vote at the end of the night as to who has earned the "good roleplaying" reward.

I attempted a few times to hand out free-hand roleplaying experience, but the PCs didn't like it, because they felt they all played it to the hilt... I much prefer players voting for a tangible reward that they can use.

I started that too many moons ago and I discovered something interesting. I had a long running "Evil Campaign" in Greyhawk back in 3.0. I'd give Roleplaying Experience at the end of every session. Then, I'd have the players vote on a card and the player with the most totals would get the bonus exp (or magic equipment, etc). Players were informed that in case of a tie (everyone votes for themselves) then I cast a vote.

After about a month of gaming, four sessions, one of the players said, "why don't we figure out who would benefit the most from the experience?" They all voted for the Barbarian who was pivotal in keeping the party alive by soaking up damage. He got his level from bonus exp and next week rolls around. Same question, "who would benefit most?" The Wizard would hit 5th level and get his Fireball.

I didn't think of it at first but I liked what was happening. There was definitely a sense of camaraderie growing between the players. I let them have it without interfering. No sense in taking away player ingenuity.

 

[aurance]

As long as everyone had a good time at the table, everyone gets the same XP. What's the point of giving different people different XP anyway? Level disparities suck.

 

[FadedC]

I remember back in the days of early living greyhawk they had a vote for the best player at the table at the end of the session. I can't remember what the official criteria for "best" was, but roleplaying was usually a major part of it.

Eventually people realized it tended to be a reward for the most over the top comically insane character at the table. If you played a serious realistic character you had no hope. Wasn't really a big deal because the reward was pretty minor, and those players could be fun to have at your table. But it was funny that much like some people will go out of their way to be combat munchkins, others would go out of their way to be roleplaying munchkins....never playing a character who couldn't ham it up enough to win the award.

Eventually though they got rid of the reward. Not because of anything above, but simply because the voiting was an extra pain that the DM had to resolve at the end of the session.

 

[Aenghus]

I'm against xp rewards for roleplaying in general, but would consider other rewards as suggested by others above.

Reasons for opposing

• Roleplaying is often its own reward
• Roleplaying is a talent, and some are naturally better at it than others
• Some people tend to play "over the top" characters, even when the setting or pc concept contradicts this. Rewarding this behaviour exhaserbates it.
• These awards inherently reward social PC concepts over quieter concepts, as its in general much easier to shine with a gregarious pc. So much so that social players will tend to play every character as social, even when they aren't on paper.
• Some players are very entertaining, but this isn't necessarily good roleplaying. The two can be confused

Generally I find each group finds it's own balance in this area. Some emphasise IC roleplaying, possibly to the extent of histrionic melodrama, others a more action style.