Best Method of Dividing XP?

[Arc]

I use a modified 3.5 method. *EVERYONE* in the party, PCs, NPCs, cohorts and followers, special mounts, special companions and special improved familiars *all* count towards the number to award xp to.

So - instead of having that party of four that has 4 cohorts, 4 animal companions, mounts or familiars being considered a party of four and the same as a party of four with no hangers-on, they are considered a party of 8+.

There is *ZERO* reason why cohorts should not be counted in the party total when determining xp. I don't use the "cohorts get 2/3 xp of their leader" rule. Why should a cohort get 2/3 xp while a PC who is two levels lower than another PC get full xp?

Basically - a bare party of four has a harder time than a party of four with additional muscle in the form of cohorts'n'followers and/or special mounts and companions or improved familiars, so they should get more xp for the same encounter.

You've managed to find a way that manages to directly punish players who choose certain feats and abilities that are already underused. If you were looking to completely discourage players from playing paladins, druids, wizards/sorcerors/hexblades, then congradulations! Otherwise, your method is unfair to players who want to take character choices meant to expand the roleplaying opporunities and tactical options of their characters. You may want to reconsider it, before you effectively house rule those classes out of your game.

 

[D-rock]

I would either give out equal xp, or give out an amount that I think makes sense. That way low level characters aren't going to try to "powerlevel" their way up. They wont try to get a person 15 levels higher than them that can help beat stuff they shouldn't and help them stay alive. The situations where the characters levels will be that far apart will be rare indeed. If for some reason that needed to happen, and it was a situation where they would still have a reasonable chance of survival at their level with the help of the higher level pc, then I would give them xp as if they fought a encounter equal to their level.

If their levels are pretty close then I wouldn't bother with giving them different xp.

 

[Cheiromancer]

It sucks to not be able to contribute. It sucks to manage a D&D group when some cannot contribute.

Therefore the best system to me is the one where the low characters catch up ASAP.

So - I work out XP based on each characters level, divided by the group size. ie - for a 9th level character and 3 8th level characters, I look up the 9th level award and divide it by 4, and award that to the 9th level character. Then I look up the 8th level award and divide it by 4 and award it to the 8th level character.

Also - this means that spellcasters who craft items for the other characters in the group don't get punished for doing so: They'll eventually hit a point where the missing XP means they're a level behind when XP comes around and they'll catch up.

This is the 3.5 philosophy; you've described it very neatly. I have a method of calculating XP that does exactly this, only with a formula, not a table.

Using that formula I've figured that if a spellcaster stays about 1 level behind the rest of the group, he'll get an extra 2000+ xp every level to burn on magic items, etc.. Or if he stops spending xp on other things, he'll level up about 2000 xp before his companions do; then for a while they will be tied. Considering that at high levels spellcasters generally seem more powerful than non-spellcasters, maybe that is a good thing. Level 15 fighters and rogues will hang around with level 13 or 14 wizards and clerics, and will shine more than if the levels were equal. Though this violates the convention that all classes are equal.

The formula is pretty easy: square the CR of each monster and multiply by 300. Total and divide by the number of players. Each player character divides the result by his or her character level.

So the party you describe could fight a CR 9 monster, who would be worth a base 9*9*300 = 24300 xp, divided by 4 players is 6075. 6075 divided by 8 is 759, which is what the 8th level characters get. 6075 divided by 9 is 675, which is what the 9th level character gets.

The 8th level characters get 12.5% more xp than the 9th level character does. They also need 11% less xp to get to the next level; 8000 xp as opposed to 9000 xp. So they will get that 8000 xp when the 9th level character has only earned 7111 xp. For a while they will thus be the same level. Then the 9th level character will advance to 10th, and they will catch up a little more, and so on.

 

[Campbell]

Here's the Excel file I use to determine experience awards accounting to the method Cheiromancer just described.

 

[jmucchiello]

I chose other because I don't allow mixed groups. Everyone levels together. There is only one xp number for the group. Item creation is the only rub here. Currently it hasn't been abused. Yeah, the wizard is technically a few hundred behind but I still level him with the group.

 

[S'mon]

I can think of a good justification for higher level characters getting more xp- on average, they do more.

Yeah - if there are 3 10th level characters & 1 2nd level in the group which defeats a CR 10 encounter, I'd typically just give the 10th levellers each 1/3 of the XP pot and give the 2nd leveller a small ad-hoc award.

 

[Tiberius]

We use the XP system from Unearthed Arcana, which dispenses with the "Well, the average party level is 5.23, any you were facing a CR 8 monster, so that gives us (insert math here) XP" bits of the system in favor of giving each monster a set amount of XP based on their CR. For instance, a CR 1 creature is always worth 300 XP and a CR 10 creature always worth 9,600 XP regardless of what level the PCs are. It also adjusts the XP chart slightly, so that after level 6 you start needing substantially more XP to level compared to the chart in the PHB.

 

[Cheiromancer]

We use the XP system from Unearthed Arcana, which dispenses with the "Well, the average party level is 5.23, any you were facing a CR 8 monster, so that gives us (insert math here) XP" bits of the system in favor of giving each monster a set amount of XP based on their CR. For instance, a CR 1 creature is always worth 300 XP and a CR 10 creature always worth 9,600 XP regardless of what level the PCs are. It also adjusts the XP chart slightly, so that after level 6 you start needing substantially more XP to level compared to the chart in the PHB.

I hate that fixed XP system with a passion.

Not the principle, but the implementation. The implementation is highly incompetent.

A good fix is to make one require (x^3)*100 xp to be at level x (round up to the nearest 1000 xp if you want the numbers to be prettier). So characters start at 100 xp, get to 2nd level at 800 xp, 3rd level at 2700 xp and so on. Monsters are worth (CR^2)*100 xp each. You can set treasure equal to xp. A CR 1 monster is worth 100 xp and has treasure and equipment worth 100 gp, a CR 2 monster is worth 400 xp/gp and so on.

The numbers are off a little; at 10th level you'll have almost twice the recommended wealth (assuming you save every penny), but it is not bad.

 

[KB9JMQ]

I just tell the party they level up when I decide it is time.
Normally between 13-15 enounters where I believe the party gained experience.
I like the characters to learn how to use their new powers/feats/skills a bit before moving them up again.

 

[werk]

Grim Tales gives more XP to higher level characters? Why? Is it explicitly done to maintain level differences indefinitely? This makes sense in certain narrative contexts, but I don't think it's desirable in the general case.

I would say it's probably done so the 1st level hobbits don't get tons of xp for watching the 20th level ranger take out the wraiths. (power-leveling?)

So you are saying that it is fair for low-level characters to get the same or more xp then their higher level party mate that does all the work? How much xp do you suggest the two 1st level halflings get for missing with their sling for 8 rounds strait while the ranger completes the encounter?

I do basically 3.0 everyone gets a fair share of xp method, with variable compensation (bonus/penalty) for contribution to the encounter/session. Read that as, watchers get less xp than do'ers.