XP Awards for Driving Off Opponents

[Gantros]

I'm curious how others handle this situation. The DMG states that XP should be awarded when a challenge is overcome. But should this apply to opponents who are driven away rather than killed or captured?

I've encountered lots of ambiguous situations related to this. For example, common sense would dictate that if an opponent is using hit-and-run tactics against the players, XP should not be awarded until the threat is removed by killing, capturing, or disabling the opponent. But let's say the PCs have to make it through a forest where spirits are continually dashing in, making a few attacks, then melting back into the trees. They could stand and fight, but their best chance of survival is to keep moving and make it through to safety as quickly as possible. Even if they never manage to kill a single spirit, how much experience should they get for simply surviving the ordeal?

A similar problem occurs with a recurring villain, who occasionally appears to give the PCs a tough fight, but always manages to retreat before he can be overcome. Clearly the PCs are gaining experience with each battle, but it doesn't seem right that they should get the full XP award if they are unable to finish the job.

My most recent issue is with the Dismissal and Banishment spells. Although they are capable of taking a powerful opponent out of combat instantly, there's nothing in the spell descriptions that prevents the opponent from returning to the plane it was banished from to attack the PCs again. Does this warrant giving the caster of the spell full XP?

 

[nameless]

I'd like to expand this question a bit. What about ghosts, liches, and vampires?

The party can (relatively) easily reduce one of these guys to 0 hp and send them packing. But it could be much harder to permanently take them out of commission by smashing the hidden object that will bring them back.

Should the PCs get full experience for beating them, or reduced experience for not permanently beating them? And should they get experience every time they encounter the ressurecting guys?

 

[dcollins]

I tend to give partial XP for situations like this. Say, half XP for the first to you drive off an opponent. A quarter more if you do it again. The rest of the XP if you finally destroy it for good.

You might consider the DMG Variant: Story Awards (Mission Goals) for some of these situations. For the forest example: Take off half the XP from monsters and reserve it for getting through the forest successfully. Award the other half for actually finishing off any monsters/spirits.

Many other DMs certainly take a more liberal view, awarding full XP every time a monster is encountered and the PCs manage to continue afterwards for any reason.

 

[kirinke]

what awarding xp's for thinking intelligently? for example, running like heck when you're party is clearly overmatched?

 

[James McMurray]

I award XP for driving off the foe. But I also give the enemies XP if the party flees or is killed. When the group returns, its possible that the enemy will have gained a level.

 

[Gantros]

The main issue with awarding full XP for a foe that's driven off is that it can allow PC's to earn it multiple times even if they only kill the foe once. With the Dismissal example, an Outsider with Plane Shift or a similar ability can just keep coming back, and the PC's will can repeatedly earn XP for defeating it until it makes its save.

The problem with awarding partial XP, as per dcollins' suggestion, is that it may not always be deserved. In the example with the spirits, a single hit may be enough to drive them off, which hardly seems worth earning half the XP for actually defeating them.

I thought about giving the players a percentage of the full XP equivalent to the percentage of the damage they did as a proportion of the opponent's total HP. But that idea doesn't work very well with the Dismissal example (because it would give them full XP every time) or the spirit forest example (because it is difficult to do any significant damage to the foes before they disappear).

 

[James McMurray]

Its ok to give xp multiple times for overcoming the same creature multiple times. The party presumably risked their lives each time. If they didn't, there was no risk, and therefore no XP. If they did, then perhaps the enemy should get smarter before just coming back over and over? A one-shot item of Greater Spell Immunity (Dismissal, Holy Word, and Banishment) will help, as would a contingent dimensional anchor targetting itself.

 

[evilbob]

I agree with James McMurray; I tend to view XP as a reward vs. risk and not as reward vs. killing things. If the situation was less risky than a normal encounter with an enemy (there is no threat of death, for example) then there is less XP. If the threat is the same, the XP is the same.

 

[Pax]

I'm curious how others handle this situation. The DMG states that XP should be awarded when a challenge is overcome. But should this apply to opponents who are driven away rather than killed or captured?

Is driving the enemy off sufficient to achieve the party's immediate goals, and/or work towards their long-term goals? If so, then they have indeed "defeated" their opposition, and successfully overcome that particular challenge. If, OTOH, they were hired to capture or kill the opposition in question, they have failed.

The trick here is, "defeat" does not have to be total - you don't have to KILL the dragon to defeat it; driving it off, or heck, even just hiding from it, could constitute "overcoming the challenge".

I've encountered lots of ambiguous situations related to this. For example, common sense would dictate that if an opponent is using hit-and-run tactics against the players, XP should not be awarded until the threat is removed by killing, capturing, or disabling the opponent.

I disagree. If the enemy is using hit-and-run tactics, their ultimate goal is to kill or capture the PCs. Every time the PCs survive and avoid capture, they have defeated their opponent ... by the simple expedient of preventing his plans form being successful.

What it comes down to is this: the players should never be denied XP simply because the DM decides to have one or more o the "badguys" hightail it, in order to recycle them for a later encounter!

Let's take that "repeatedly hit and run" example further: if the foes defeated were never coming back ... would you award XP? If your answer was "yes" (and by the RAW, it should be!) ... why shouldn't you award that same XP, just because you want to re-use the surviving NPCs at a later date?

But let's say the PCs have to make it through a forest where spirits are continually dashing in, making a few attacks, then melting back into the trees. They could stand and fight, but their best chance of survival is to keep moving and make it through to safety as quickly as possible. Even if they never manage to kill a single spirit, how much experience should they get for simply surviving the ordeal?

Their goal is, as you stated, "to get through the forest alive and relatively intact". If they do so, they shoudl get experience. The spirits apparently wish to prevent the PC's from doing so - so every encounter that doesn't kill the PC's or force them to retreat back out of the forest, should be worth XP to the party.

If you feel a quick hit-and-fade isn't as challenging as a stand-and-fight, unto-the-death encounter ... then lower the effective EL accordingly; it'll be worth less experience, but should consume a similarly lesser portion of the party's resources (if each hit-and-fade only uses up 1/5 as much XP as a normal encounter would, then the party shoudl probably get close to 1/5 as much XP in turn ...).

But awarding NO experience unless the enemy is dead or tied up at the PC's feet only encourages the players to think "if you want the XP for it, KILL it before it can run away!" - which is contrary to what 3E's experience system is supposed to be about.

A similar problem occurs with a recurring villain, who occasionally appears to give the PCs a tough fight, but always manages to retreat before he can be overcome.

Every time he runs away before he can be defeated, the PCs successfully foil his plans. They should get full XP for he encounter, because they have, absolutely and without question, defeated the villain!

what awarding xp's for thinking intelligently? for example, running like heck when you're party is clearly overmatched?

Your goal is "stay alive". The obstacle or challenge between you and that goal is "these guys could make us VERY dead, VERY quickly". If you manage to avoid their ability to make you dead, threby staying alive, you should get SOME XP, at least - but only if the critter is honestly inclined to PURSUE the party. Otherwise, simeply not cutting your own throat would earn you nigh-infinite XP (everytime you draw breath, that's another time you haven't comitted suicide ... etc, etc).

The main issue with awarding full XP for a foe that's driven off is that it can allow PC's to earn it multiple times even if they only kill the foe once.

You should not have to kill a foe, just to earnthe XP.

Here's a question for you: if you kill someone, and they come BACK (their friends spring for a True Resurrection), fully intent on getting revenge ... do you lose the XP?

 

[Liquidsabre]

I'm also in the award XP for multiple encounters with the same "whats-it" camp. Whether it is the same creature (driven of the first time and back for more) or simply a new creature (also encountered after the first ran off) the Xp award for defeat is the same.

A single creature doesn't have a set amount of XP it may award to others that defeat it. XP rewards represent life experiences gained and the successful completion of some kind of goal/achievement/etc. Heh, if a creature is defeated and escapes, all the better. Afterall, now the creature has knowledge of the PCs and knowledge is a terribly potent weapon to use against the PCs for said creature, muahahaha! So feel free to award the XP for a successful rout, all the better to torture/1taunt those PCs with the creature's return or continual harrasment lol!