Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Trickstergod" data-source="post: 921079" data-attributes="member: 10825">Truth be told, I'm having a bit of a quandary here. On the one hand, the druid acted with tactics and intelligence.On the other, the encounter seemed rather easy because of that.Then again, if the character just waded into semi-direct combat with the giants, and won, wouldn't it be worth the full XP?Then again, if the druid just waded into a position that the giants could smack him, when he didn't need to, he was acting like a moron.If a DM would have awarded the character full XP for going toe to toe with the giants and winning, then quite simply, the druid should get full XP for having defeated the giants without going toe to toe with them - possibly more. After all, stupidity should not be rewarded, whereas intelligence should be.Personally, I think I'd go with reduced XP for both circumstances. Reduced more for the character actually stupidly and needlessly risking himself, reduced less for being smart about it. Stupidity shouldn't be rewarded over playing strategically. That's what should really decide whether the druid receives XP or not. Whether he would for being stupid, as well. If not, well, then maybe the druid shouldn't get any XP for being smart, either. If, on the other hand, a dumb character would have gained XP for beating the giants, a smart one most certainly should earn just as much.</blockquote>