Alternative XP Award System for 4th Edition Home Games

[Westgate Polks]

One of the biggest criticisms of 4th edition is the lack of role playing during play sessions. Some critics point to the increased tactical nature of the game while others suggest the dearth of RP stems from the introduction of the skill challenge. Regardless of what game mechanic(s) detractors point to, one thing is certain: the current rewards system contains no mechanism for rewarding or encouraging role playing. To demonstrate that role playing is an in-game priority, introduce a way to reward that behavior. That will encourage many players to engage in that activity more. However, the system should not too heavily penalize those players who don't role play; it's a fine line.

There was a system on the internet(1) (going back to Rolemaster and early 3rd edition) that introduced ten categories of achievements; characters could earn tic marks in most or all of the ten categories then, at the end of a session, the number of tic marks each character earned was summed and xp awarded accordingly. That system is too subjective for LFR play, but with some modifications for 4th edition could be re-introduced for home game usage. The usage of the system was simple:

1. record significant achievements in each of the ten categories for each PC during a session.
2. total those tic marks for each player at the end of the session.
3. multiply the total by a level-dependant factor and award the xp accordingly.


The theory behind the system was a little more elaborate but elegant at the same time:

1. it should take a standard number of sessions to advance from one level to the next.
2. a typical player should earn a standard number of tic marks per session.
3. the categories should have roughly equal weighting.
4. there is a simple model to determine the number of xp / tic mark as a function of current character level.


In converting the system to 4th edition, the heavy logarithmic basis made the simple model a bit more complicated; the final equation is not too tough to work through and there is a table for xp / tic mark by level.

Here are the categories for 4th edition:

* Combat
* award 1 tic mark for every significant combat the character participated in
* award 2 tic marks instead for every major combat the character participated in

* Ritual
* award 1 tic mark for every meaningful casting of a ritual or usage of an alchemical formula

* Creation
* award 1 tic mark for every meaningful crafting usage during a session
* award 1 tic mark for materially contributing to the play of a session: painting minis, drawing maps, etc.
* award 1 tic mark for significantly contributing to the background information available for the game

* Skills
* award 1 tic mark if a character used a significant portion of his trained skills to advance the session

* Puzzle
* award 1 tic mark for solving a puzzle
* award 1 tic mark for circumventing a trap
* award 1 tic mark for unraveling a portion of the sinister plot

* sacrifice
* award 1 tic mark for heroism in the face of bad odds
* award 1 tic mark for taking one for the team, etc.

* learned
* award 1 tic mark for uncovering significant new info pertaining to the campaign

* character
* award 1 tic mark for keeping in character, showing quirks, etc.
* award 2 tic marks instead for exceptional characterization

* goal
* award 1 tic mark for progressing towards the party goal
* award 1 tic mark for progressing towards a personal goal

* social
* award 1 tic mark for good NPC role playing
* award 2 tic marks instead for exceptional NPC role playing

The formula for the XP / tic mark award is as follows:

y = 38.25e(0.1828x)

There is also a simple table available in the appendix.

Each player should, on the average, earn 7 tic marks per session. This number could vary wildly, from as few as 4 or 5 to as many as 10, but 7 is a pretty stable number. This means that, as per the 4th edition DMG, characters will advance every 2-3 playing sessions (the DMG calls for advancement every 6-8 encounters, assuming the completion of both a minor quest and a major quest during that span as well). More importantly, this affords the DM several opportunities to reward good role playing: sacrifice category, character category, goal category, and social category. The player who contributes on par with everyone else will likely earn 2 tic marks in this category; the player who goes out of their way to contribute here could earn as many as 6 tic marks. That's 3 times the XP for role playing and that will add up over time.

This rewards system also takes into account various class features that do not receive recognition under the DMG system: skill usage, bravery & self-sacrifice (primarily a defender's gig), ritual & alchemical casting, etc. This system is also highly subjective, which makes it unsuitable (without significant reworking) for Living Forgotten Realms games; this is, for the moment, a system for home games.

Please let me know if you have any questions, and please do not hesitate to report how the system works for you in your home games.



APPENDIX

Level XP / Tic Level XP / Tic Level XP / Tic
1 55 11 345 21 2135
2 65 12 410 22 2560
3 80 13 495 23 3075
4 95 14 595 24 3695
5 115 15 715 25 4435
6 140 16 855 26 5325
7 165 17 1025 27 6390
8 200 18 1235 28 7670
9 240 19 1480 29 9210
10 285 20 1775

 

[Mechanimal]

I really like this idea, and I was looking for more ways to incorporate roleplaying with the party. What I'm currently doing is basing DC for certain skill checks on role-playing. For example, if someone has to convince someone and use diplomacy, I will make them speak for themselves, and based on their dialogue, I will set an appropriate DC. If they have a ravishing speech, maybe it's only DC 15; with a decent speech, DC 20; and with a sub-par speech, DC 25. I didn't mean to shove my ideas into your thread, but I thought I would elaborate. I'm going to try this tic system next session and see how it goes.

 

[Alex319]

I assume that this system replaces the traditional XP system?

If so, I don't see why you even need to convert tick marks to standard XP values. I'm assuming that the system is set up so 20 tick marks = 1 level, so you just need to keep track of the tick marks and after the character has got to 20, he goes up a levle. The conversion to standard XP is a completely unnecessary step.

 

[Mesh Hong]

While it's an interesting idea I am personally a little dubious of the actual effect it would have on gameplay and balance.

This system to me seems like it would give different characters different XP awards and therefore advancement rates. Isn't one of the basic principles of 4e balance that all the characters have the same XP and advance in levels at the same rate?

On a more general level it is my opinion that either people want to Roleplay or they don't, I doubt whether any player is sat there thinking "I want to Roleplay my character but I am not going to bother unless there is some XP in it for me". It is the way the players interact with the DM (and therefore the characters with the world) that either encourages or discourages Roleplaying.

If you want to encourage Roleplaying in your group I think you might be better served by directly engaging their characters in ways that they will find interesting or confronting. Grab their attention in a way that will make them respond without spending 5 minutes checking their skills, get them to react in character without thinking about game mechanics.

As for reinforcing Roleplaying all you really need to do is congratulate them at the end of a game session (or even after a scene), a little praise can go a long way. There is also nothing stopping you from just awarding extra XP all round because it was a great session, again if you tell them this it will add to everyones sense of accomplishment and positively reinforce the type of game you want.

The problem with introducing lists to manipulate player behaviour is that you are introducing another mechanic that can both be a distraction from the actual game play and in an extreme case give players another mechanic to exploit (which could lead to arguements over what exactly is a meaningful casting of a ritual or usage of an alchemical formula).

As an aside, for the last portion of my campaign I actually stopped giving my players XP, I just announced when the characters had gained a level at appropriate points. This allowed me to time level progression with the big scenes in the campaign without having to worry about whether there was too much or too little actual combat. I was actually surprised how well it worked, and my players never raised any issues with not getting running totals of XP, all in all it was quite liberating.

 

[EP]

On a more general level it is my opinion that either people want to Roleplay or they don't, I doubt whether any player is sat there thinking "I want to Roleplay my character but I am not going to bother unless there is some XP in it for me". It is the way the players interact with the DM (and therefore the characters with the world) that either encourages or discourages Roleplaying.

If you want to encourage Roleplaying in your group I think you might be better served by directly engaging their characters in ways that they will find interesting or confronting. Grab their attention in a way that will make them respond without spending 5 minutes checking their skills, get them to react in character without thinking about game mechanics.

As for reinforcing Roleplaying all you really need to do is congratulate them at the end of a game session (or even after a scene), a little praise can go a long way. There is also nothing stopping you from just awarding extra XP all round because it was a great session, again if you tell them this it will add to everyones sense of accomplishment and positively reinforce the type of game you want.

I'd even go so far as to disagree with the "lack of roleplaying in 4E" theory completely. While the new system emulates computer RPGs (and even they encourage some roleplaying - there's an "in character" server in WoW that I played in exclusively), only dice-affecting options are presented but there is nothing to prohibit roleplaying. It's no different than other editions and I don't remember reading anything in 1E that specifically mentioned talking in character, conflicts of alignment, or anything like that.

I award tiny pieces of XP for really good roleplaying moments (or anything where the idea was just too cool not to reward them) in doses of 25, 50, or 100 XP. It hasn't made a difference so far and gives incentive for other players to step it up a notch as well. You reward their strengths and encourage them to overcome their weaknesses. Right now, there's only a difference of 100 XP or so between party members and everyone's always gone up in level at the same time.

Was this something you tried before, Westgate, and didn't get a high enough response or are these "tics" a response to player demand?

 

[keterys]

I'd rather leave advancement separate from it - if you want to give game mechanic rewards to roleplaying, then give out action points, restore encounter powers, give the occasional extra reward from an NPC.

But even then, realize that what seems like roleplaying to the DM may not be what seems like roleplaying to some of the players and it may come across as favoritism for those who play in the way you prefer, rather than for those are making an effort to RP as part of the group.

Also, if you want more out there roleplaying, tell people before they make characters. Some character concepts are naturally more reticent than others.

 

[El Mahdi]

I agree completely with Mesh Hong and keterys.

D&D is a cooperative game. There is no “Winner”. Successes come from accomplishing goals, both individual and group, but overall it’s a group effort. A character on his own in a typical D&D world, won’t live very long. Lennon and McCartney were right, “I get by with a little help from my friends”.

Because of this, I view XP awards as group awards only. Everyone progresses at the same rate. This keeps the party power level consistent throughout the group, and encourages group participation over individual achievement.

XP signifies the Experience a character gains as they learn and progress. In the real world, experience is gained by doing, observing, and most often by making mistakes. IMO, Ticking off accomplishments or filling squares is counter to, and unduly limiting to, how experience is actually acquired. You won't get players "roleplaying" better, you'll get players concentrating on "filling squares".​

But, there still needs to be a mechanic to encourage good game play and to reward acts of heroism and sacrifice/selflessness. I prefer to do this with individual awards that have a more immediate and tangible effect – specifically, extra action points. Extra Healing Surges can have the unwelcome effect of throwing off the difficulty of encounters (players don’t have to worry about getting hurt if they have too many healing surges). Extra Magic Items and such can have the same problem, and also make other players feel left out. Action points allow players to “Do More”, which is exactly what you want to encourage the most, but does it with a limited, consumable, resource (one that doesn’t provide permanent changes to the character itself).

 

[Mechanimal]

I can see how this may cause some problems. I thought of a slight revision to this that may (or may not) work. You could have a cumulative list of tics that are used for the entire party. Different tics for good cooperative roleplaying, and cooperative combat. Just achievements that are gained with the entire party. It may or may not reward action points or XP, but either way, you'll have the party progressing at the same rate and reaping the rewards of being a great team. Anyway, that's just a thought.

 

[keterys]

Yep, that would be a more palatable solution. If you did do that, I'd suggest having some of the tics be less grounded in game mechanics or more influenced by RP rather than casually obtained in a min/max fashion.

For example, things like have a lasting effect on the game world rather than perform a ritual, make an in game sacrifice due to character personality instead of generically taking one for the team, etc.

After reading this I stumbled across a wotc blog that did talk about how he gives out APs for some RP oriented stuff based on Burning Wheel. May be worth a glance:
Whoops! Browser Settings Incompatible
And to a lesser extent:
Whoops! Browser Settings Incompatible

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

It seems to me that if you go with a party-wide set of 'ticks' and make the things you grant them for be all non-mechanically related story line stuff then haven't you basically recreated the quest XP component of 4e? I understand that the 4e writers made quests a fairly narrowly defined set of things (though it is pretty open-ended in theory) but maybe a more liberal and flexible use of that concept IS what is being proposed here after you deal with the issues people have raised.

I tend to agree with the observation that RP is not something that a specific rewards system either encourages or discourages. D&D isn't a competitive game and the vast majority of players I've had weren't in it to outdo the other players rewards-wise. They may increase their enjoyment some by faster advancement overall, at least up to a certain point, but I think that's better addressed by simply advancing the party faster (or slower if they like that better).

I don't think skill challenges are necessarily either good or bad for RP either. It is really dependent on how they're designed and used. DMs who are new to the concept and/or not particularly adept or well-versed in the most effective ways to use them may well quash certain RP opportunities, but at the same time I've both seen and run examples of SCs where they were great RP opportunities. I think its kind of an acquired skill and I'm still not 100% satisfied with the way either DMG approaches that aspect of SCs. Maybe its just something you have to learn from experience and it can't really be explained, though I tend to think that isn't entirely the case.

Perhaps "quests" should have gotten more attention and defined in broader terms and that might really be the best answer. Hard to say though, there may be no answer that works for all groups.