D&D 101: A lesson in fun

[Whisper72]

Heh... indeed. I DO use XP, but dole it out completely as I see fit.

When determining the amount of XP I use the following guidelines:
- how many XP to the next level?
- how do I rate the adventure in terms of how far they should still be removed from the next level (or sould it bring them to the next).

These are the only guidelines I use in my actual capaigns when determining XP for the adventure as a whole. For individual encounters (i.e. if a session was mainly roleplaying, but not of the kind that solves anything or otherwise grants the earning of XP and had one or two small combat encounters) I used to use the monster XP's (1st edition rules) calculated per individual monster defeated.

I am considering running a 3.5 edition game, and have studied the new rules extensively and can find little flawed with the ECL/CR system, keeping in mind that it is designed with an 'average' party versus 'average' and 'approriate' monsters for that level.

 

[MerricB]

If you took away the CR system entirely, what would you be left with?

No idea of how powerful monsters are in relation to a party, that's what.

D&D 3E is a very complicated game when you consider the array of special abilities, spells, attacks and other factors that go into combat. The game has moved way past the "kobold, goblin, hobgoblin, orc, gnoll, bugbear" progression of the early game.

The Challenge Rating system is a guide, as others have repeatedly stated. It gives you a ballpark estimate of how tough a creature is.

Because of the Challenge Rating system, I can quickly determine what sort of monsters may be suitable challenges. I still have to exercise judgement myself.

Let me give you an example of where the CR system comes in very handy:

The Pit Fiend. Hit Dice 18d8+144 (225 hp)
The Elder Earth Elemental. Hit DIce 24d8+120 (228 hp).

What are their challenge ratings? The pit fiend is CR 20, the elder earth elemental is CR 11. That's a huge, huge difference. For monsters with similiar hit points... wow.

Without the CR system, you might think that the two monsters were closer together... could the Pit Fiend be that much tougher than an Earth Elemental? Yes, it could be. But doing that assessment for yourself is very, very tough, especially if you haven't ever used a Pit Fiend before.

Cheers!

 

[rushlight]

If you took away the CR system entirely, what would you be left with?

2nd Edition.

I can remember my first DMing forays in early in 2nd edition. Judging monsters was a dangerous proposition if you had never used the monster before, or had never played against it. If you weren't careful, it's special abilities could fly under the radar and really cause some problems.

That's still true today, but the CR system gives you warning flags that something might not be right. As in your example with the Pit Fiend and the Earth Elemental, you can - without examining stats - quickly determine which challenge would be appropriate for your party of four 11th level guys. Of course, if your party all has holy weapons, mega AC items, fire immunity items, and enormous saves (like a whole party of paladins!) then the Pit Fiend might be a possible challange - even at CR 20. You just gotta know what your PCs can do.

Another thing that hasn't been mentioned... This discussion seems to be weighted toward DMs who apparently set fire to a character sheet if the PC dies. Let's not forget that after about level 6 death becomes something that can be remedied. By that time you're not "all dead" - you're just "mostly dead" to quote Miracle Max. Sure, it's a bit costly, both in GP and in XP - but those are fairly easy to recoup. Sure, it's not something that you would like to happen, but in all honesty, it's just a minor setback.

 

[Whisper72]

On another note, the CR of a beastie in how it plays out also has a lot to do with DM nastyness/inventiveness. A bunch of kobolds played really smartly, using ranged weapons from a good ambush, access to molotov coctails and supported by a kobold adept who uses her spells very effectively is a lot bigger challenge then meeting up with a bunch of kobolds on the road and a fight breaking out.

The whole CR/ECL stuff is a good guideline, but DM insight and discretion is the ultimate adjudicator of the challenge that an encounter posed and the XP that the characters deserve for the way they handled the encounter....

 

[Piratecat]

if the DM refuses to award the correct experience for an encounter, you have every right to recalculate it yourself and show him or her the correct number based on the rules. If he or she still refuses to award you the correct amount of experience, get up and walk out. You don't need to play in a game where the DM abuses his godlike power.

I don't know any good DMs who would tolerate this. One of the jobs of the DM is to be fair so you don't have any one player getting preferential treatment, but I expect my players to trust me when it comes to receiving xp. Not that I ever use the chart as written anyways.

 

[Fenes]

I don't know any good DMs who would tolerate this. One of the jobs of the DM is to be fair so you don't have any one player getting preferential treatment, but I expect my players to trust me when it comes to receiving xp. Not that I ever use the chart as written anyways.

Very good, essential point: If the players do not trust the DM they should stop playing. In the end, no matter the rules and open dice rolls, a DM that is competent and has a bit more backbone than the average jellyfish is still all powerful. Anything the PCs do and "earn" is at his or her whim. Exp tables, expected treasure levels and such are just crutches that leave some players the illusions that the first rule - the DM is the final arbiter - does not matter.

In my games, I aim to drop such crutches. If a player wants something, like a magic item, I expect him or her to tell me what he or she would like so I can prepare for it, probably insert it in the next adventure, or even design a new adventure for it, or tell him or her there is no way such an item will enter my game. No "saving up gold and then going shopping" in my campaign, and no "destroying items and siphoning off gold and restricting availability by scarity and dice rolls".

Same goes for gold - don't worry about it, just assume you have enough for your chosen lifestyle, and all its trappings.

And same for xp - just tell me when you want to level up, and if the group agrees we all rise a level.

This leads, however, to a game less centered on items and advancement, and player who want to "earn" their items and xp will not be comfortable with a playstyle where you ask the DM OOC for items.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Not that I ever use the chart as written anyways.

Heck, I don't even use points, but Adventure Based Leveling (i.e., "The adventure's done, everyone gains a level."). One thing we do use is a "debt count". In this, if you use XP (Magic Item Creation, Spells, etc.), it goes into the debt. If your debt equals (Current Level x 1000), the pool is reset (with carry-over, of course) and you don't level up for one adventure.

We handle level loss the same way; Instead of loosing X Levels, you simply don't level up for X adventures.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

I don't know any good DMs who would tolerate this.

I certainly wouldn't! I always adjust the XP from "book" values, in large part because I give XP for non-combat solutions, which isn't terribly well supported in the core rules.

Another aspect of that is that I rarely tell the players precisely what they fought. That's part of the "preserving the mystery" element of the game - the players don't know that they fought a shape-changed yuan-ti psion, or a human wizard, or a human-appearing monster with spell-like powers unless they figure it out themselves - so in a good portion of instances, the player wouldn't have any idea what the XP for an encounter "should" be.

 

[MDSnowman]

Hi there

I think you make a lot of good points but I have to disagree with you on your opinion of EL. I use an EL calcutator to help me to restrain my urge to sic 4 5th level Orc Rangers on my low level heroes. EL keeps DMs from launching potentionally TPK siutation at their heroes.

As a DM the only excuse I could think of for throwing big monsters at a party is because how the game is structured. Some players really enjoy pklaying big bad characters weighed down with powers, and some DMs love to use new monsters. I know, from experience, that I've always wanted to use certain monsters in my campaigns, but never got the chance. If I wasn't as fair as I am I could very well say "Well they'll figure out that the black phoenix is too hard for them and run for it." it's really easy to second guess a DM but realize for every hour you spend playing the game he's spent at least two building the campaign and coming up with adventures.