Calculating XP drives me crazy

[Fajitas]

I am fascinated by this conversation, as I also hate calculating XP. I've pretty much defaulted to a system wherein the PCs level whenever I want them to (about twice a year), allowing me to coordinate leveling with convenient story goals.

Up until recently, we didn't really have anyone making magic items or casting spells that cost XP. But, this most recent roung of leveling, we did start running into that problem. I figured that the amounts of XP involved were small enough that they wouldn't cause any serious problems, but that's a stop-gap solution at best.

Your system, however, seems like a much better long-term solution.

A couple of specific notes/comments:

1) I use Action Points in my game. I loves 'em (though I use the D20 Modern rules, where the number of dice you get to role increases as the PCs go up in level; is that not how Eberron works?). I definitely encourage not making Action Points bankable. When you know anything you don't use goes away, you're much more inclined to use them. I've had PCs use action points on the most ridiculous things: trying to get an in-game promotion, or not pass out after drinking badgerbite, because they know they'd better use 'em or lose 'em...

2) For character death, I tend to deal with it in a very non-quantifiable way that models the slow catch-up of the normal version, but doesn't actually require me to calculate XP. Again, I set leveling times based on story convenience, and have characters who are lagging behind the rest of the group level-up at different times than the rest of the party. That is:

Joe dies and is raised at 10th level. The rest of the party is 11th.

About two-thirds of the way to the party hitting 12th level, Joe hits 11th. He gets to be at the same level as the rest of the party for awhile.

The party hits 12th level. Joe remains at 11th.

About half-way to the party hitting 13th level, Joe hits 12th.

Everyone hits 13th together.

Couple this with the loss of the Action Points as a result of death, and you get something that sounds pretty good to me. True, not everybody levels at once, but it keeps Joe from feeling totally screwed compared to the rest of the party, yet still penalizes him for dying.

Also, it avoids the weirdness of Joe jumping two levels at once.

Admittedly, I tend not to worry about training time in between adventures, as I feel that just interrupts the story. Thus, Joe can level in my game while the PCs are traveling to their next adventure, rather than having to hold everybody up for weeks while he trains.

An alternate scheme might be to let it take three levels to catch up, and nix the Action Point penalty. Under that scheme, it would probably look something like:

Joe hits 11 when the rest of the party hits 12.

Joe hits 12 shortly before the rest of the party hits 13.

Joe hits 13 about half-way through the party's 13th level.

Joe hits 14 with the rest of the party.

It's not elegant. It's not publishable. But it works for me.

Can't wait to see what finally gets worked out here, as I'm almost certain to yoink it myself.

 

[Cerebral Paladin]

Your new death rule is much better than the first one you proposed, IMO. I'm still a little bothered by the "double level" effect. Are you completely unwilling to level asynchronously? If you're not, then you can do something like:
Characters who are below the average level of the party may decline their action points, in which case they level in 7 sessions instead of 10.
So Joe the fighter falls behind a level, but when everyone levels up he (still behind a level) levels up without the APs and then catches up to everyone 7 sessions later. He's on par for three games, and then falls behind again. He can keep repeating the no APs/7 sessions trick until he's caught up, and you can round off at the end to resynchronize. Voila! He eventually catches up, stays underpowered for quite a while, and then is ultimately back on track.

The problem I see (besides losing the "everybody levels at once" feature), is that the giving up your action point solutions while still behind means that you are upping the penalty for death: Not only are you behind in levels, but you're behind a level AND behind APs.

Are you worried about seeing a blitz of APs right before leveling? If I can't carry APs forward, I'm still going to hoard most of the time, but then the session (maybe the two sessions) before levelling, if I'm in a big fight or whatever, I'll spend like there's no tomorrow. That could be a good thing: climactic fights where the PCs are particularly heroic. But it could also be a bad thing, where when you get to a big fight everyone spends too freely and undercuts the challenge (or, worse, when you have an average fight that falls at the wrong time the PCs turn it into a cakewalk).

Lastly, I'm a little concerned about the XP to AP conversion stuff, and nonbankability. I'm a little worried about situations where a PC wants to make an item, so saves the XP for when there's some downtime, but the campaign is going on all cylinders so there's no opportunity for crafting until it's time for the next level up, and so the XP goes into AP for the last session and THEN there's the level up and downtime, and the PC makes their new item but uses most or all of the new XP pool. That could seem kinda annoying. (The same thing can happen in the standard system: I'm sorry, you leveled, now that XP is unavailable. But there you get the benefit of leveling faster. Here... I could see someone just feeling like they got hosed by the campaign's pacing.) Of course, if downtime is frequent enough, this concern evaporates.

 

[Nifft]

How about this?

You can spend an Action Point to save your life. When you would normally be killed, one of your currently equipt magic items will instead take the fatal blow, destroying the magic item and dropping you for the length of the combat. (You are stable, but unconscious, and the residual magic if the item guards you from environmental hazards until your friends find you and wake you up.)

-- N

 

[Piratecat]

Not a bad rule, Nifft, but not for me. I don't want to sidestep the issue by removing death from the game entirely. That rule wouldn't just strain my suspension of disbelief, it would jump up and down on it with golf cleats. (Although it's worth noting that I'd gladly use it in a superhero game, say.)

CP, I'm bothered by the double level effect as well. The easiest thing to do is not level everyone synchronously. This is trickier in my game, since we use training time, but not necessarily a fatal flaw. Your suggestion of people behind the power curve turning in all their action points is a good one, except that it leaves them doubly disadvantaged; they're behind the curve AND they have no AP AND they can't create magic items that level. There must be a good way to find a happy medium.

I'm less worried about the lack of bankability, since this is the same problem anyone has when they level. Your point of the importance of downtime is a great one, though, and something I hadn't considered.

 

[Nifft]

The Most Evil Idea E.V.A.R.!

Group XP. That's right, group XP. Calculate how much XP the whole group needs (which is not that bad), and hand out 120% of that over the course of an adventure. When anyone needs to cast an XP spell, make an item, or lose XP for whatever reason, take it form the pool.

Make your players deal with each other's decisions.

-- N

 

[Baron Opal]

I, too, have wanted to eliminate XP, but have not for the above reasons. Also, as I wanted greater feat and skill choices in my games I instituted my Null Level rules* which consumes XP as well. Currently, I have been considering awarding fractional levels, or just rescaling what "xp" means.

It takes 10 xp to go up a level. Expect 0-3 xp per session, depending on what occurs. Naturally, as you go up in level the requirements to earn xp becomes harder. A Null level costs 4 xp. If you run out of mana points (i.e. action points) you can use xp at 1:1.
What about magic items? Well, scrolls and potions consume a trivial amount of xp. Those can be ignored. Wonderous items can take a significant amount of xp, however. Perhaps a cost of 1 xp for a "major" item. Or, perhaps increasing the xp you need for next level by 1, although the difference is minor. What about wands and permanent minor items? I don't know.

 

[Abraxas]

Just a couple of comments

1) Why not give everyone 5 + (1/2 Character Level) APs and let them trade them in for XP to craft or cast as needed instead of 5 APs plus an XP pool? Also, instead of granting a flat XP/AP rate, have it scale with the number turned in. So if they trade in 3 APs they get, say, 500 * (1+2+3) = 3000 XP. If they trade in 4 they get 500 (1+2+3+4) = 5000 XP - enough for a wish. Also - in the case of spells used to raise dead characters - make the character being raised spend their APs for the XP needed to power the spell

Of course you may need to limit the max number that can be traded in at one time or perhaps require that the trade in must occur just before the action they are traded in for . . .

2) Instead of losing a level with a death & Raise Dead why not use a negative level model
-1 to attacks/saves/ability checks/skill checks
loss of one of the highest level spell slots
loss of one HD worth of hit points (Wiz/Sor -4, Rog/Brd -6, Clr/Drd -8, Ftr/Pal - 10, Brb -12)
Until a new level is gained, at which point one of these death/raise dead induced negative levels goes away

 

[elbandit]

Why not just take a page from Star Wars D20 and assign a set amount of XP per session?

Players still get XP and you could easily control how quickly they level. Plus you coul award bonus XP for exceptional ideas and role-playing.

 

[Blue Sky]

If you're worried about the double level, try this:

If someone dies, they have an xp+ap "debt" of whatever level they were. They automatically lose the xp and ap until they fulfill it.

Example: Joe's a 15th level fighter. He has 5 ap and 7500 xp.

During the course of the game, he spends 2 ap on rolls and 2500 xp on magic item creation (through the wizard), leaving him with 3 ap and 5k xp.

Joe dies. (sob)

When he gets brought back, he loses all remaining ap and xp, and when he levels up next time, he loses 2 ap and 2500 xp from his new total, to pay off the rest of the debt.

************

Otherwise, it sounds good. My only two other suggestions would be:

1. Just give them ap, like Abraxas said. Keeps bookkeeping easier.

2. Allow a character to donate xp for item creation on a 1 for 1 basis, if the item is going to be used by them. This lets the fighter still have a "meaningful" contribution.

 

[Imruphel]

I like your ideas, Piratecat.

I use both action points and fate points. Action points are pretty much as per UA/ECS so no surprises there (although I also allow them to be spent for a free reroll). Fate points represent the "special" destiny of the PCs. A fate point can allow a PC to end a combat at -8 hp rather than dead, automatically roll a natural 20 and can be spent to offset the level loss from raise dead. Each PC gets one fate point per level. They can be accumulated.

Anyway, the fate points have worked out really well. I really like your ideas about action points and the XP pool. I think I might use them in my next campaign.