Do you or have you ever penalized characters in terms of XP?

[Mark Chance]

Punitive XP is silly, at best. XP represents a character's growth in knowledge, talent, power, et cetera. How does engaging in activity X result in a net loss of experience?

To avoid your plot from being derailed, don't make plots with rails. If your players are playing in a way you don't appreciate, then talk to them about expectations, et cetera. If no agreement can be reached, either get new players or stop DMing.

 

[the Jester]

Way back in the day, yes.

It has been a long time and it would take some seriously harsh circumstances for me to do it again.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

Punitive XP is silly, at best. XP represents a character's growth in knowledge, talent, power, et cetera. How does engaging in activity X result in a net loss of experience?

An interesting question for which I'll attempt a golfing analogy. I have a powerful golf swing (that got me down to a handicap of 7 once upon a time) but one that was not a perfect swing. At one stage, I wanted to get better so I went to see a particular golf pro who tried to make my swing more orthodox. Now while I tried this, my game literally fell apart. I perservered for a couple of months but my handicap started going backwards and so I went back to my old grip and swing and had to start afresh even with that (it did not warp me back to my old play and handicap overnight). Now, if someone suggests to me that I should change my swing and I'll become a scratch golfer, I just smile and say to myself, "I'm not going down that path again".

Now while not a great analogy, changing my swing represents perhaps killing enemy NPCs for no purpose other than murdering them and taking their stuff. "He attacked me so therefore I'm entitled to kill him". Changing my golfswing set me back a heap; the only thing I learned was not to try it again - something that perhaps negative XP might mimic. In the end, I was just pondering the motives behind killing a threat that most likely does not need to be killed.

To avoid your plot from being derailed, don't make plots with rails.

Now this is a comment out of left field. I don't have a plot that is being derailed... can you please explain this one?

If your players are playing in a way you don't appreciate, then talk to them about expectations, et cetera.

This I think is a much better way of handling this situation rather than waving around what I term the "DM mallet of doom" (negative XP). Again though, this was not discussing a specific in-game situation as much as pondering why the only good enemy NPC is a dead enemy NPC for a lot of players? I further pondered the use of negative XP as a shock tactic to make the players think about what their characters were doing rather than following the usual pattern of kill and loot.

If no agreement can be reached, either get new players or stop DMing.

This advice seems a little extreme. What on earth were you on when you wrote this?

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Aus_Snow]

Once again, I'd like to quote something wise and/or neat from a D&D 3.5 corebook. Mainly because I believe they get overlooked and underappreciated in so many ways. The DMG, this time, p. 41:

"In general [. . .] you shouldn't use experience penalties in any [. . .] situation. While awards can be used to encourage behavior, penalties don't serve to discourage bad behavior. They usually only lead to arguments and anger. If a player behaves in a way you don't want him to behave, talk to him about it. If he continues, stop playing with him."

Yes, it does say "in any other situation", but that's referring ONLY to XP loss from spells and item creation, so hey, sue me.

 

[fba827]

As a former player once told his fellow players "Stop killing the bad guys when we catch them! They might escape from jail and seek revenge on us later, but then we get xp for defeating them twice!"


To answer your original question - i've never not given xp for the situation you describe. And I don't think I would because I know it would bother my fellow players who will (rightfully or wrongfully) believe that the xp is owed to them since they defeated the challenge by way or murder, but defeated the challenge none the less.

I think it comes down to why are they doing it? as you describe, it sounds like they just want to bring closure and tie up all lose ends...

but what if their mission is to bring someone back alive? then it will get them (for at least one quest) to play in a different mindset. Or maybe they are in an area where the laws are very strict about vigalante justice methods, and so on.

And also, once in a while someone comments on the murders done by the PCs... after all, it isn't an ethical delima unless there is at least some social acknowledgment of it.

 

[Mark Chance]

Now while not a great analogy, changing my swing represents perhaps killing enemy NPCs for no purpose other than murdering them and taking their stuff.

Interesting, but I don't think it works. Changing your golf swing didn't result in a net loss of experience. It added to your experience. I think a better analogy is that your golf swing represented 1E human dual-classing.

Now this is a comment out of left field. I don't have a plot that is being derailed... can you please explain this one?

Well, first off, if you don't have rails, then it's fair to note the comment wasn't aimed at you. Instead, it would be aimed at the few posters who've mentioned players taking actions that disrupt the DM's story.

This advice seems a little extreme. What on earth were you on when you wrote this?

I was on a chair.

 

[amethal]

In 2nd edition, it was common for published modules to include XP penalties for the DM to enforce if the PCs did something the author didn't like.

In some cases, it made sense from a certain point of view. If you accept that the PCs goal is to foil the bad guys, and there are certain things they can do that result in their allies getting wiped out and the bad guys getting stronger, then it might make sense to penalise XP. (You get XP for overcoming challenges and hindering the bad guys, and lose XP for creating unnecessary challenges and helping the bad guys.)

In most cases, however, it was the author saying "Ooh, the PCs have been naughty by not acting in the way I want them to; they deserve to be punished."

Either way, I didn't deduct XP then, and I don't do it now.

If I find I'm running a campaign for PCs who are a bunch of ruthless psychopaths, I'd explain to the players that I'm not having any fun, and either the characters need to start behaving a bit better, or someone else is going to have to DM.

(In theory, the same would apply if the PCs always refused to bend any laws, never offered any violence to anyone and never did anything adventurous - I'd ask for more excitement - but that situation has never come close to taking place!)

 

[Umbran]

I can think of at least one game that explicitly uses the "act properly, or else!" style of XP - the old FASERIP Marvel Superheroes game. Killing people (or through inaction allowing them to die) was a very bad idea for heroes in that game. It wasn't even a great idea for villains.

But, in that case, the mechanic was there to enforce genre - in 1980s comic books, superheroes just didn't kill people. It was made clear beforehand, and everyone knew the consequences.