D&D deserves a better XP system

[Hypersmurf]

Now, the party can bring out the bard to regale them, talk to them, and, even befriend them. Now a party can reap in the XP for "overcoming the challenge" without even breaking into the wand of cure light and might even walk away with a few allies in the process.

That's a flaw in the DM, though, not in the system. If the DM lets an encounter go past with no attack rolls being made, he's not doing his job.

I can only point to the wisdom in the 1E Monster Manual, under "Lynx, Giant":

Whaddya mean we gotta talk to this lynx? The last monster we talked to ate half the party!

Now, that's DMing.

-Hyp.

 

[Nightfall]

Not really, it's irony. But it is good DMing I'll grant you.

 

[S'mon]

Is this fair to group A? They played the game far more skillfully than the slackers of group B, yet still get the same xp. What do both groups learn for this? Just muddle through and kill things, you’ll level up just as fast regardless.

I don't see any reason to reward over-cautious play more than the standard hack & slash style. Taking ages to plan out an attack you were going to win anyway is a waste of time IMO, it just means you take longer to earn the XP. D&D PCs should aim to plan an appropriate amount for what they expect to face, not go all Rainbow-6y over the blind kobold in the next room. It is an heroic fantasy game after all, it doesn't really support the play style you advocate.

 

[Li Shenron]

"In all my years of DMing the 3rd edition" I used to give XP as the core DMG rule, plus some minor bonus from good roleplay and good strategy.

Currently I think the best way for the DM is simply to give as many XP to control the speed of characters advancement, no matter what the DMG says.

Soon I will probably simply ask the players "ready to go to next level"?

 

[glass]

If they slaughter their way through 1000 orcs and free the princess, X points. if they trade with the orcs and get her free X points. If they sneak in and free her, X points.

The irony is that this is exactly how the core system straight out of the DMG works.


glass.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I think Athelstan makes some good points, actually. At the very least there are things that concern me about the xp system too.

As a simple example, the DMG states (something like) that xps should be calculated based upon the creatures base CR and not modified for the parties circumstances e.g. are they fresh, are they knackered - the latter party will have a much harder time of the encounter.

Some possible thoughts I've had (or seen) about awarding exps.

1. Assess challenge from the results.

For each encounter decide how easy or difficult was it for the PC's? Did the creature fail its first save and disintegrate on round 1? Perhaps that was a minor challenge/resource drain and calculate xps as CR-2. Did the creature kill one party member, take two down into negatives and leave the last person on single digit hp before it was taken down? That could be considered a very serious challenge and be worth CR+2 (in each case CR == average party level here, and is just used for assessing xps.)

i.e. use monster CR when planning encounters to give you an idea of the difficulty of the encounter vis a vis the players, but award experience on the basis of how much hassle the party had overcoming the encounter - did it use up 20% of resources? Then calc xps as if CR==level. Did it use less paty resources? More? Calculate xps as appropriate.

2. Provide standard xps for all

This is basically in the DMG. Everyone gets 50xlevel xps every encounter, or Xxlevel xps every adventure or everyone gains a level every three adventures etc.

3. Provide xps for time alive

More radical - assume that every person in the campaign world gains xps just for breathing. If basically sedentary/commoner type it might be 1xp per day, nobles, professionals and people with responsibility 3xp per day, adventurers 5xp per day. This doesn't yield a constant rate of progress through the levels, and would put a stop to the teenage archmages which crop up in 3e It would also give meaning to downtime etc. I don't imagine this would be terribly popular though.

4. Provide xps only for training
Another radical option. Nobody gains xps just for doing stuff, they have to bring their money back to the city or their den or wherever and then spend time and money on training themselves. Whatever conversion rate is appropriate can be determined by the DM - e.g. 1gp = 1xp. The limiting factor is that training takes time, and you can only spend level*100gp each week, maximum. Thus it takes time to convert xps into money.

5. Divide generic rewards into "level of challenge" and "effectiveness of play"

This idea comes from someone whose name I can't remember and whose website I can no longer find Basically there are two things to consider when assessing xps rewards

a) level of challenge
minimal level*50xps
minor level*100xps
standard level*150xps
major level*200xps
incredible level*250xps

b) effectiveness of play
minimal level*50xps
minor level*100xps
standard level*150xps
major level*200xps
incredible level*250xps

(I've probably got the figures a little wrong here).

In Aethelstans original example party A might get standard level of challenge, major effectiveness (netting a total of 350*level xps) while party B get standard level of challenge and minimal level of effectiveness (netting a total of 200*level xps).

Fine tuned to ensure that PC's gain levels at a rate appropriate to the campaign I could see this latter system working particularly well to handle the kind of situation he describes.

Cheers

 

[diaglo]

1. Assess challenge from the results.

which has always been a part of the rules. but as noted is arbitrary and left upto each individual referee/DM

2. Provide standard xps for all

all of those involved. some may have more or less activity in the encounters and can be rewarded or penalized.

3. Provide xps for time alive

been rereading your nw prof stuff from 1edADnD again, have you? or the Living X stuff. this is one of those off the screen kind of ideas.

4. Provide xps only for training

require training, not as optional. i hate how everyone blames Gygax for them not following the rules.

i have always used training. even in my OD&D(1974) campaigns. it made more sense for continuity in a long term campaign.

 

[diaglo]

...The whole notion leveling by killing is a Gygaxian relic of D&D's war gaming origins. In the early days, D&D was essentially a miniature combat game placed in a new context: the "dungeon." Before role-playing and campaign worlds and all the rest, D&D was essentially a game about killing monsters. Yet here we are, a generation later, and 3.5 remains saddled with a level advancement system which is based almost entirely on killing monsters. D&D has evolved into a game far more complex and compelling than its war gaming origins but still DMs dutifully tally up experience points for kills...

don't blame us or Gary for your lack of imagination.

we played OD&D(1974) and used non combat situations. we played long term. we had fun.

3-4hr per session; 5 sessions per week; 50 weeks per year; for 10+ years.

~ 900hr to gain 1 level in the campaign....and everyone liked it that way.

i refereed for 14 players.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Oh, come on, guys. The man has a point, as Plane Sailing's post notes. D&D's XP system is built around overcoming challenges: "Challenges" being shorthand for monsters and traps. While it is possible to award role-playing or story XP, the system doesn't make it easy to do so in a balanced manner; paradoxically enough, the 3e XP guidelines, which are the most comprehensive to date, actually raise an objection to RP or story XP by noting that such XP awards distort the encounters-per-level-gain system established using challenge XP.

Aethelstan: You may wish to use the system I've been using since 1e. When designing an adventure, simply figure out the XP award that PCs will receive for each trap, monster, and other direct "challenge" they face, add those awards together, then divide in half. One-half normal XP will be awarded for each challenge overcome; the remaining half goes into a pool from which story and RP XP will be apportioned. (Try to restrict individual RP awards, though, as they distort the distribution of PCs' levels within a given party.)

 

[Bregh]

The whole notion leveling by killing is a Gygaxian relic of D&D's war gaming origins. In the early days, D&D was essentially a miniature combat game placed in a new context: the "dungeon." Before role-playing and campaign worlds and all the rest, D&D was essentially a game about killing monsters. Yet here we are, a generation later, and 3.5 remains saddled with a level advancement system which is based almost entirely on killing monsters.

XP for killing monsters in OD&D, OAD&D, and B/E D&D is miniscule. Pit fiends were worth less than 10,000 xp on average (divide that among 4-8 8th level+ characters and see how far that gets you). Huge, ancient, spell-casting red dragons were worth a measely 7758 xp.

Substantial XP awards in the older games was derrived almost entirely from treasure and magic items acquired--and the manner in which it was acquired was never spelled out. You could level along quite happily never having to lift a sword against a monster, gaining xp for loot garnered by trickery, misdirection, stealth, and just clever play.

Which may not be everyone's style, to be sure, but you aren't painting a fair or accurate picture of the "unenlightened" early days, either.

Edit: Excellent post, BTW, Plane Sailing!