Dividing XP among characters

[Himoura]

yes share the xp for the enounter, always unless as stated above somebody doesn't paticipate by his/her own actions.

In one encounter we were on a boat and having to shoot some water creater, our monk who mind you had a sling +1 from memory decided to roll over and go back to sleep, after the enounter he was awarded no xp, when he foolishly asked why, the DM was justifable quiet annoyed.

As for the second its very difficult to look at with so little information, did the 2 PCs plan it all and then do it, or did the rest of the party help.

In our games we've had rogues what have either scouted, found traps and disarmed them and were award xp since he/she did it all by themselves, but it had to have been something very difficult and then they weren't awarded full xp. I think it was something like a DC 30 and the rogue needed to roll 17+ to get it. he went for the risk and reaped the rewards.

So i guess I'm saying is generally share xp but if somebody does something 'heroic' i guess they should get a little reward, otherwise they might not be so willing to chance their character in the future

just my little 2c worth

 

[Celebrim]

Not in my campaign. It's still split.

I've been in a high level campaign where the ranger went scouting and the other PC's in the original party didn't see him for six game time months.

That's an extreme case, but I'm not talking about 'I'm going to go see what's in the next room'. I'm talking about, "I'm going to disguise myself as a nobleman, sneak into the castle, gain entrance into the formal ball, see what a little alchohol and small talk turns up, rummage through the evil Duke's study, maybe off a gaurd and purloin a few jewels on my way out, and be back in the morning." Or, in the fighter's case, "Sell me as a slave to the bad guy who runs the gladiatorial arena so that I can get close to the imprisoned count. Wish me luck."

In your game, what if the cleric casts silence on the rogue before he scouts?

Then you are still dealing with a situation that is basically a party of adventurers. But what if the rogue is captured and he's not rescued or doesn't escape for many game days? Does he get a share from the adventures of the other party members? Do the other party members get a share from his adventures?

Does he get a share?

In your case, obviously.

Share and share alike... solves all sorts of problems.

Assuming you play games that are basically dungeon crawls.

 

[shilsen]

Assuming you play games that are basically dungeon crawls.

Hardly. In a very roleplaying-heavy game in an urban setting, where PCs are constantly off doing things on their own, just having all PCs get equal XP works very well. I'm running such a game and playing in one, and giving PCs XP based on what it is that they're individually doing would be a horrible idea, from both logistical and balance perspectives.

At the end of the day, XP is primarily a metagame construct awarded on arbitrary criteria, which exists primarily because players like their PCs to go up levels and increase in power. I find it much easier to treat it as such and not try to pretend that there's some sort of an objective explanation/basis for it. All PCs get the same amount of XP, whatever they do, so they advance at the same speed (which is the speed I choose). Simple.

 

[Jesus_marley]

I would recommend against any sort of MVP award.

What if it was decided by the players?

 

[Nonlethal Force]

I think alot of it depends on the group, too. I've worked long and hard at getting a group that is there to be helpful to one another, not competitive. If I were to start handing out individual XP that would get shot in the foot. Players would try to be doing more on their own, leaving the party behind, demanding more DM attention than the rest. Bleah. Go the "shared XP route." It's much easier to create a game in which the players cooperate.

 

[pallandrome]

At the end of the day, XP is primarily a metagame construct awarded on arbitrary criteria, which exists primarily because players like their PCs to go up levels and increase in power. I find it much easier to treat it as such and not try to pretend that there's some sort of an objective explanation/basis for it. All PCs get the same amount of XP, whatever they do, so they advance at the same speed (which is the speed I choose). Simple.

This can actually be extended to ANY rewards in a non-competative game. The gold the team gets provides a similarly arbitrary (and similarly meaningless) boost in power. The party, in most cases, will remain very close in power level to the villains they are in contest against, no matter how much power they attain. Dividing resources unevenly just makes this job more difficult, and thus is not worth the trouble, in my eyes.

 

[Presto2112]

Alright, I'm convinced. XP, in game, is evenly shared.

However, I do have an exception which I'm carrying from my own DM. I'll share it with the group, and it's up for discussion, but it's something in place for just about every DMed I've played with, and I shall be carrying it on.

I've asked my players to contribute things to my game world to help flesh it out (not unlike what I've done in this thread ). When a player makes a submission that I can use, he or she receives a commensurate XP reward. Nothing large; somewhere between 50 - 200.

 

[werk]

I've asked my players to contribute things to my game world to help flesh it out (not unlike what I've done in this thread ). When a player makes a submission that I can use, he or she receives a commensurate XP reward. Nothing large; somewhere between 50 - 200.

I would advise against this. It's well intended, but you are rewarding the player's character for player behavior, not for character behavior. Keep these separate.

Maybe if you said that player doesn't need to bring snacks/drinks next session, that would be more appropriate to me.

 

[Chiaroscuro23]

I think alot of it depends on the group, too. I've worked long and hard at getting a group that is there to be helpful to one another, not competitive. If I were to start handing out individual XP that would get shot in the foot. Players would try to be doing more on their own, leaving the party behind, demanding more DM attention than the rest. Bleah. Go the "shared XP route." It's much easier to create a game in which the players cooperate.

Presicely, I've seen a system of voting on small awards for categories like "most bravery", "best roleplaying", and "best idea" at the end of every session, and seen them work very well. However, this is clearly a result of the type of groups they were in. These awards served as a sort of "group hug" as one player put it, wherein players would actively seek to spread the wealth, defer nominations, and nominate others for their bravery, ideas, and roleplaying. That worked very well, IME and IMO.

However, with a different group they would work very poorly. If the awards were used in a hurtful way, always went to the same people, or were generally competetive I would certainly not use them. Back in high school I gamed with all adolescent boys, and basically everything was used as part of ongoing competition, complete with hurtful taunting and occasional fistfights (including both D&D and nongaming activites. We were kids, y'know?) In that sort of group I wouldn't ever do such a thing.

-C.