S'mon's New XP System

S'mon · Jan 20, 2019

I'll be awarding XP per session, not per fight - I'm not going to say "No XP for that fight!" or "XP for that fight!" - but I'll take a record of achievements during session.

I don't particularly want the Pavlovian response of seeking out fights to get XP. For the Thule game especially, I plan to give XP for getting treasure & also for spending treasure. For the PoTA game XP for uncovering and defeating cult activity.

One reason I don't anticipate complaints IRL is that I'll be looking for an advancement rate about twice what I usually see when running the 5e XP system as written. But I guess if I get a lot of complaints "You're railroading us by not giving XP for that easy fight!" (*sigh*) then I'll change the system or go back to RAW XP.

Blue · Jan 20, 2019

Libramarian said:
I fear that the difference between insignificant and significant encounters will not seem as definite to the players as the difference between zero and some XP. In which case it might feel arbitrary or even railroady when @S'mon decides not to award XP. 1 XP vs. 2 XP offers just enough granularity to make it clear to the players that they can advance without abiding by the DM's definition of significant play, albeit slowly.

If an encounter were truly pointless, then I imagine the monsters would immediately flee or surrender, in which case I would not award XP for slaying them. Likewise I'm not suggesting awarding XP for killing random peasants/noncombatants.

Okay ... so, returning to what I actually asked, do you want some XP for everything? Negotiating a particularly good rate at the inn? Or are some things to "work-a-day" that they shouldn't get XP. This isn't "truly pointless" like an immediate surrender, but is still just things you do in daily life of an adventurer, including combat.

Don't focus on combat as something in a different category. Killing off a random bear in the wilds might be the "less learned" path then proper camping discipline in terms of food and scraps so as not to attracted it in the first place for a bunch of 4th level previously urban heroes.

Again, how much does your driving improve on your daily commute? Sure you had to negotiate some traffic, and that person in the expensive car who acted like they owned the road, but it's something you've done many times before. But hey, it's really a risky proposition where you are distracted for just a few seconds and you can lose your life and kill others as well so you need to be able to do it right, every time.

S'mon · Jan 20, 2019

Libramarian said:
I would much prefer doubling the numbers to allow 1 XP for easy encounters/minor achievements. This precludes the weirdness of 0 XP combats and is only slightly more complex. I also kinda like 20 XP to level for symmetry reasons.

So 20 XP to level. 1 XP - Easy encounter/minor achievement...
...A minor achievement might be learning about or agreeing to do a quest.

I would not want PCs to level up from 20 trivial 'achievements' - I don't even see how agreeing to do a quest is an achievement.

I did consider using 20 XP as that is basically the Rules Cyclopedia (Mentzer/Allston) quest-xp system. But I still wouldn't have given XP for trivial stuff and non-threatening/easy fights.

Libramarian · Jan 20, 2019

Blue said:
Okay ... so, returning to what I actually asked, do you want some XP for everything? Negotiating a particularly good rate at the inn? Or are some things to "work-a-day" that they shouldn't get XP. This isn't "truly pointless" like an immediate surrender, but is still just things you do in daily life of an adventurer, including combat.

Don't focus on combat as something in a different category. Killing off a random bear in the wilds might be the "less learned" path then proper camping discipline in terms of food and scraps so as not to attracted it in the first place for a bunch of 4th level previously urban heroes.

Again, how much does your driving improve on your daily commute? Sure you had to negotiate some traffic, and that person in the expensive car who acted like they owned the road, but it's something you've done many times before. But hey, it's really a risky proposition where you are distracted for just a few seconds and you can lose your life and kill others as well so you need to be able to do it right, every time.

As I just mentioned in a different thread, I don't think of XP as a simulation of learning, rather a metagame currency that gives game success and failure more immediate bite, making it more exciting. In principle I'm not opposed to awarding XP for skillful haggling or camping discipline, if that's what the game is about and the mood at the table is genuinely triumphant when the players succeed at those activities. D&D is typically about killing monsters, finding treasure and completing quests though, and the rules are best-suited for games about those things.

S'mon said:
I would not want PCs to level up from 20 trivial 'achievements' - I don't even see how agreeing to do a quest is an achievement.

I did consider using 20 XP as that is basically the Rules Cyclopedia (Mentzer/Allston) quest-xp system. But I still wouldn't have given XP for trivial stuff and non-threatening/easy fights.

I don't mind PCs levelling up slow and steady from easy encounters/minor achievements. I like how the traditional XP system provides some support for playing risk-seeking or risk-averse.

Re agreeing to do a quest - in my games the quest-giving NPCs are typically more powerful than the PCs, rather than less so, so giving your word to complete a quest is not without risk. Also the PCs typically try to get some of the payment up front, with the rest after completion of the quest - so functionally equivalent to getting some XP for agreeing to a quest, and more after completing it.

Blue · Jan 20, 2019

Libramarian said:
As I just mentioned in a different thread, I don't think of XP as a simulation of learning, rather a metagame currency that gives game success and failure more immediate bite, making it more exciting. In principle I'm not opposed to awarding XP for skillful haggling or camping discipline, if that's what the game is about and the mood at the table is genuinely triumphant when the players succeed at those activities. D&D is typically about killing monsters, finding treasure and completing quests though, and the rules are best-suited for games about those things.

I don't mind PCs levelling up slow and steady from easy encounters/minor achievements. I like how the traditional XP system provides some support for playing risk-seeking or risk-averse.

Re agreeing to do a quest - in my games the quest-giving NPCs are typically more powerful than the PCs, rather than less so, so giving your word to complete a quest is not without risk. Also the PCs typically try to get some of the payment up front, with the rest after completion of the quest - so functionally equivalent to getting some XP for agreeing to a quest, and more after completing it.

Well put. I definitely see your side of this now.

At my table I'm trying to cut down on the mentality that there is a reward just because there's a fight - because it causes characters to seek out fights and provides a disincentive to solve encounters via other methods (stealth, social, spells, distraction). But that's one goal, not all of them and you've done a great part explaining why you want it, plus that you're not focused just on combat.

Thanks for the civil discussion.

WhosDaDungeonMaster · Jan 20, 2019

I had to explain to my players that once they reach a certain level of power, most "minor" low XP encounters aren't played out anymore. I assume during their travels, for instance, they will run across goblins, orcs, and such, but unless I make it into something worthy of the time involved, it is simply inconsequential and not worth it. We have limited time to play and more exciting things to do.

However, I award XP for anything I or my players obviously feel is significant, even outside of combat. Great ideas or tactics, excellent role-playing, etc. can all earn XP (or in some cases inspiration).

I think any XP/leveling system can work as long as it fits the style of your group's game.

Libramarian · Jan 20, 2019

Blue said:
Well put. I definitely see your side of this now.

At my table I'm trying to cut down on the mentality that there is a reward just because there's a fight - because it causes characters to seek out fights and provides a disincentive to solve encounters via other methods (stealth, social, spells, distraction). But that's one goal, not all of them and you've done a great part explaining why you want it, plus that you're not focused just on combat.

Thanks for the civil discussion.

No problem! I think the ideal way to disrupt the Pavlovian response to combat is for it to be dangerous enough that if the PCs charge in without care they might easily lose more XP than they gain. I.e. instead of removing the cookie, mix in some electric shocks. This is difficult to do with vanilla 5e however, and involves a higher PC death rate than what most people want - certainly compared to classic D&D where PCs might have only 1/3 - 2/3 chance of making it to the next level.

Dausuul · Jan 20, 2019

Seems pretty good to me. I go pure milestone, myself, but my campaigns are pretty linear in design. (It's not that the players can't go off the beaten track; they just don't for the most part. They like clearly defined objectives.) This seems like an effective approach to handling "milestones in the sandbox," without adding a lot of bookkeeping.

Greenstone.Walker · Jan 20, 2019

S'mon said:
Basically the idea is 1 XP per significant encounter or achievement, such as a quest completion or big treasure haul, 2-3 XP in exceptional cases.

I'm doing that in a game and I feel it is working great.

I have a plastic bowl on the table and I'm putting little plastic coins in it (from a pirate playset). Each coin is one moderate encounter (which could be from any of the three pillars). Ten coins is a level.

Players aren't allowed to take the coins from the bowl and apply them to characters until the characters have a day or two of relaxation and reflection. I don't like the idea of levelling up in the dungeon.

The first level in each tier (5th, 11th, 17th) cost a few more coins (I'm thinking 13 but that might change) to give the players a bit more time at those important levels to get to know their character's features.

S'mon · Jan 20, 2019

Greenstone.Walker said:
I'm doing that in a game and I feel it is working great.

Thanks, that's good to know!

I ran my first game with it today - Primeval Thule, only about 3 hours play time after chargen. By the end the 5 PCs had earned 7 XP, 2/3 of the way to 2nd level. Which was pretty much where they would have been using RAW XP I suspect - I was maybe a bit generous. I kinda got the impression they might have been happier if I'd not told them their XP tally and just levelled them up next time, which will likely be mid-session.

S'mon's New XP System

S'mon

Legend

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal

S'mon

Legend

Libramarian

Adventurer

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal

WhosDaDungeonMaster

Guest

Libramarian

Adventurer

Dausuul

Legend

Greenstone.Walker

Adventurer

S'mon

Legend

Similar Threads