XP for non-challenging challenges

[Space Coyote]

Should Challenge Ratings be lowered for "quick" fights?

For example, lets say a party of 4 level 13 characters fight a CR 15 enemy. In the first round, the party's main fighter does a full attack and gets a critical or 2 and basically takes out the CR 15 enemy in that 1 turn. Should the party get full XP for a CR 15 enemy or XP for a lowered CR because the fight was actually not that much of a challenge?

Same example but with a spell. Party faces a CR 15 enemy. The party Wizard goes first and uses an insta-kill spell like Disintegrate. The enemy fails the save and is defeated in 1 round. Should the party get full XP for a CR 15 enemy or XP for a lowered CR because the fight was actually not that much of a challenge?

For my games, I have been lowering the XP for fights that done in 1 round, but would like other people's opinions.

 

[MarkB]

XP are not only a measure of characters' competence and experience, they are a reward, one of just two tangible rewards - the other being treasure - that the DM can consistently and easily dispense.

What you're doing with this rule is rewarding your players less for doing better.

This is not a good idea.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Should Challenge Ratings be lowered for "quick" fights?

No. You're basically trying to enforce a rule on the player's that they should try to drag out the fight.

PC 1: "Wait, don't kill him yet!"
PC 2: "Why not?"
PC 1: "Because if we can make this combat last another round, we'll get more XP!"

That's really not a good situation. Do well by winning and get the XP. Do very well and get less.

 

[shilsen]

Should Challenge Ratings be lowered for "quick" fights?

Definitely. Just make sure that PCs get +50% XP for fights that last 6-10 rds, +100% XP for fights that last 11-15 rds and +200% XP for fights that last 16 rds and more. Also, PCs should get bonus XP if the enemy lands a critical or rolls an 18 or higher on a save.

 

[Ditch]

I agree with MarkB and Ifinit on this one. Bad idea to nerf XP for quick fights. The problem lies with the challenge or the power of the party, unless this only happens (like you said) when the party goes first and gets in a very lucky round to end the fight quick. If this is true then it should be a rare occurance.

 

[tzor]

My answer is NO - YES - NO ... How's that for an answer.

NO: Experience should not be based on the amount of time it takes to resolve, but upon the potential resourcs that the encounter should take from the party. Yes the character could be taken out in a round, but at what cost to the party?

YES: Now there are some exceptions where the level of an encoutner is raised or lowered by circumstance. Under those circumstances the experience should be adjusted because the circumstances adjust the encounter. Luck on the other hand is not a proper circumstance. A failed saving throw does not count as a proper circumstance, after all it could have gone the other way and required a number of spells before the saving roll was failed.

NO: Even after adjusting the encounter, there needs to be some factor to consider experience as a reward for accomplishment. Thus additional experience rewards should be made perhaps compensating for the adjustment in circumstances.

 

[Space Coyote]

YES: Now there are some exceptions where the level of an encoutner is raised or lowered by circumstance. Under those circumstances the experience should be adjusted because the circumstances adjust the encounter.

Right. For example if the party is fighting some monster that can move freely while the party is hampered (party in mud, enemy is flying, for example), you may give this a +1 CR. Or, the party is attacking a monster that is chained in a cell, while they are safely behind a portcullis using ranged weapoins, you may lower the CR. But the XP for challenges themselves should not be changed if the battle is done on a 'level playing field' as it were.

 

[MarkB]

Right. For example if the party is fighting some monster that can move freely while the party is hampered (party in mud, enemy is flying, for example), you may give this a +1 CR. Or, the party is attacking a monster that is chained in a cell, while they are safely behind a portcullis using ranged weapoins, you may lower the CR. But the XP for challenges themselves should not be changed if the battle is done on a 'level playing field' as it were.

Exactly. Basically, you should be able to set the CR of a challenge before combat begins, because the favourable or unfavourable conditions are already set. Unusual variables that occur during combat - whether they be inspired tactics from your players or a few good/bad dice rolls - do not constitute favourable or unfavourable conditions.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Right. For example if the party is fighting some monster that can move freely while the party is hampered (party in mud, enemy is flying, for example), you may give this a +1 CR.

(slight tangent) I don't agree and I don't think the DMG agrees but it has been a while since I read the relevant sections. Basically, situational modifiers do not change the CR, but you can ad hoc an XP adjustment of +/- some percentage (as a recommendation anyway, obviously you can in fact do whatever you please). Using +/- N CR is akin to forcing mathematicians to use whole numbers. What is +1 CR, like 50%?

 

[ThirdWizard]

Note that you wouldn't actually alter the CR, you would alter the EL, giving a +X% or -X% to the XP reward. Using percent changes allows more fine tuning for the XP rewarded.

EDIT: Oops Infinity already said that. That's what I get for leaving the browser open for 15 minutes then respond without refreshing!