Dividing XP among characters

[Nonlethal Force]

Let me throw in another vote for the Divide Equally part. Also, let me throw in a vote (for face to face games only) for allocating XP only once per session. If you allocate after battles, you give the impression that you only give XP for fighting and killing. Which is fine, but that makes you solidly LE (structured disrespect for life) in the D&D axis of alignments.

The main reason that I give out equal XP is because all players have their moments. Some love building combat machines. i am not particularily great at it. But I focus on the RP aspects and do that well. So, in games where combat is the only reward and DMs reward based on effectiveness, I always get the shaft. In games where the XP is equal so long as everyone participates in the whole story (regardless of success at certain aspects) then I feel like RP is as important as combat.

Aside: For PbP games I have recently changed to giving out XP after combats simply because they are so slow it helps keep the game motivated! I also give out "end-of-adventure" bonuses to reflect RP and participation over the long haul.

 

[mvincent]

Let me throw in another vote for the Divide Equally part.

Isn't it enough that the rules simply state to do so?

 

[pallandrome]

Isn't it enough that the rules simply state to do so?

Not if the OP is looking for opinions on houseruling it otherwise. Rule 0 and all that.

 

[hanniball]

as a rule of thump you should always share the xp.

Do you know where the saying 'Rule of Thumb' comes from? In the 19th century it was legal for men to beat their wives, as long as they used a stick no wider than their thumb.








(can't do much damage with that thing can we, perhaps it shoulda been a rule of wrist! -Boondock Saints)

 

[mvincent]

Do you know where the saying 'Rule of Thumb' comes from? In the 19th century it was legal for men to beat their wives, as long as they used a stick no wider than their thumb.

(can't do much damage with that thing can we, perhaps it shoulda been a rule of wrist! -Boondock Saints)

... but what do they call a Quarter-pounder with cheese France?

btw: per the dictionary, "Rule of thumb" has a much different origin:
"This expression alludes to making rough estimates of measurements by using one's thumb. [Second half of 1600s]"

This makes sense, since the measurement of the modern inch was derived from the distance between the base of the thumbnail and the first joint.

I believe your explanation for it's origin is merely a long running joke.

 

[bestone]

yeah, I always devide experience equally, then hand out *small* individual awards

I also lower the experience if i find the enounter was far too easy, much easier than it should be, but not by much mind you *same note i do raise it if it was far too hard*

 

[shilsen]

I'm a rookie DM, and I'd like the opinions of seasoned DMs in regards to the doling out of experience points.

I'm definitely in agreement with everyone who said award points equally.

And, though you might not want to go that far till you're really comfortable with DMing, I actually recommend dropping CR and other formula-based methods for calculating XP and just award PCs an amount of XP per session that'll make them go up in level at the speed you want. I've done that for my last two campaigns, both lasting 2+ years, and I don't think I'll ever use any other method of awarding XP.

 

[Presto2112]

I'm definitely in agreement with everyone who said award points equally.

Duly noted. Thanks for the essentially unanimous input everybody. I still can't shake the feeling that equal XP across the board feels a little cheap, though.

And, though you might not want to go that far till you're really comfortable with DMing, I actually recommend dropping CR and other formula-based methods for calculating XP and just award PCs an amount of XP per session that'll make them go up in level at the speed you want. I've done that for my last two campaigns, both lasting 2+ years, and I don't think I'll ever use any other method of awarding XP.

I do honestly feel that 3E and 3.5 PCs advance WAY too quickly. Two sessions, and the party is already level 2, halfway to level 3! I know back when I was playing 2E, I had an elf thief that was 10th level for close to seven months of bi-weekly games!

 

[hanniball]

I know back when I was playing 2E, I had an elf thief that was 10th level for close to seven months of bi-weekly games

But it was so easy for Thieves to level in 2nd ed. Every piece of gold they found was worth an experience point! I had a Thief that leveled from 5th to 7th level just by walking around various towns stealing everyone's coin purse. Ok, so there were a few fights here and there, but that was the majority of my xp.

... but what do they call a Quarter-pounder with cheese France?

They got the metric system, so it's a Royal with Cheese

I believe your explanation for it's origin is merely a long running joke.

and it was my attempt to keep the joke running .

 

[SlagMortar]

I do honestly feel that 3E and 3.5 PCs advance WAY too quickly. Two sessions, and the party is already level 2, halfway to level 3! I know back when I was playing 2E, I had an elf thief that was 10th level for close to seven months of bi-weekly games!

As long as your players agree with you, you might as well cut XP awards in half or some such. If you want to be able to meaningfully use the challenge ratings then you will have to keep the wealth per level about correct which would mean a reduction in treasure awards as well. However, you should be clear with the players that the reason you would like to level slower is because you have a lot of good adventure ideas for each level and want to be able to use them all before they level too high.

I've played in several games that were essentially "level by plot", which is much easier now in 3rd edition because all classes use the same experience point chart.