Do You Use XP

[catsclaw227]

When running 3.x I generally give out levels every 3-4 game sessions, depending upon how fast the party wants to level up, or depending upon what the group has accomplished.

In 4e, I started using strict XP rules (and magic item parcel rules), but in the past 9 months or so have gone back to my 3.x ways of leveling them at appropriate times in the campaign -- especially since we were running an AP and certain adventure chapters pretty much required leveling up before moving on.

I like side quests, but I don't like the idea of hacking them for the sole purpose of meeting some XP goal requirement.

 

[DizzySaxophone]

I mostly give xp BTB as I currently am running 1e ADnD and since everyone needs different amounts of xp I feel its worth it. What I do enjoy though, is that they don't just get xp for killing things, they get it for loot as well. I also tend to give xp for exceptional roleplaying, and bonuses at the end of adventures and what not.

When I used to run 3.5, I would just level them up when I felt it was appropriate, as 3.5 is complicated enough to run without worrying about xp.

 

[Rel]

I like side quests, but I don't like the idea of hacking them for the sole purpose of meeting some XP goal requirement.

When I was running 4e I gave out bonus Action Points for completing certain quests.

 

[Zhaleskra]

I like to award XP the way most video games do: every monster has their own exp award, and monsters killed, captured, or otherwise overcome, give the players that flat reward; divided equally among the number of PCs.

D&D itself did this before 3E. I think it made it easier to dole out XP that way. Additionally, it made the increase in XP per monster more transparent.

 

[El Mahdi]

I don't use the XP system at all anymore. I understand that XP was supposed to encourage roleplaying and other desired player behaviors, but in practice it just doesn't work out that way (in my opinion and experience). I see it tending to promote competition between players rather than promoting group play, ends up with people leveling at different times and can lead to a level disparity within the group, and is just one more thing that I and players have to keep track of (for minimal benefit). So, I just scrapped it entirely. Instead, I'll level up characters based on sessions or adventures. Achieving a new level is an individual and group reward for working together and completing an adventure, and everybody progresses equally (making my job easier). Typically, for an average length adventure, I'll use one adventure to level up from 1 to 2, 2 adventures for level 2 to 3, and then about 3 adventures per level after that. If it's a really long or involved adventure, I'll scale accordingly (perhaps considering one large adventure equal to 2 or 3 adventures).

For individual rewards, I do like Rel and give out extra Action Points for good roleplaying or completing quests, subplots, etc. I sometimes also give out small, low powered, one use magic items or resources as rewards. And I'll also give out Action Points to the group for good teamwork and cooperative play.

Speaking of Action Points, I kept encountering a problem with players unwilling to use them, and instead hording them for important/crucial moments. To encourage the players to use them, I changed a characters alotment of Action Points to a per-session model (instead of per level). This way my players know that they will have Action Points available again for the next session. I also give out a bonus Action Point (for use during the next session) if a player uses up all of their alotment of Action Points for a game session. Also, characters always have a minimum of one per every two encounters (combat and non-combat) even if they use up their per-session alotment, so they don't have to worry about using them up and not having any for a crucial fight. I want my players to use Action Points...a lot...so I've set up a system to encourage that.

So, by changing the way Action Points are alotted and earned, giving Action Points as a reward encourages roleplaying and teamwork, creativity, and let's players do awesomely cool things (which those silly players seem to like). Win-Win.

 

[Rel]

Not to get off on too big a tangent about Action Points, but I was using them under 4e and the generalized rule that they reset to 1 after an "extended rest" (basically a night's sleep). So that largely got rid of the tendency to hoard them. Although if they earned them as part of quest completion that involved a sort of climactic battle (after which it would be logical to rest) then I'd let them carry the AP over to the next day or encounter or whatever. I wanted them to get to reap the benefit of their efforts after all.

To kind of aim this at the topic at hand, I found that Action Points are, in many ways, a good reward substitute for the sorts of activities that XP are often supposed to encourage. For example in my Savage Worlds game that I'm currently running, I give out the equivalent of AP's when the players play toward their Hindrances. Because those Hindrances define a lot about the character's personality I reward the roleplaying when they are acknowledged. So the players get a reward for a job well done and it has zero impact on rate of advancement and that kind of thing.

 

[greatamericanfolkher]

Having seen it raised recently here, I'm curious as to how many people are using the XP system of their rpg as written. Feel free to explicate your response and the reasons behind it.

For my part, I used to ad hoc XP but now have discarded the system entirely and level up when it seems right. The main effect of this change has been to reduce the amount of bookwork I do; it also seems to have made the players less competitive among each other. One of the few aspects of 3e rules I never learned was the actual EL/CR system.

I always use the xp system as presented in a game when I DM because as a player I hate it when the DM decides "you'll level up when I say you will." (usually this is worded as "when I think it's appropriate.") I just don't like the feeling of arbitrariness surrounding it.

 

[Barastrondo]

Without the XP system, you kind of have to use different, more personalized incentives to encourage interesting play. I found myself increasingly more intrigued by those personalized incentives, so that's what I prefer.

That said, I still enjoy XP in other venues; it was fun to level in a single dramatic Swords & Wizardry session thanks to clever disposal of a giant and acquisition of his treasure, and I keep a careful eye on the XP bars of my various disciples in Assassin's Creed Brotherhood. So I have nothing bad to say about the concept.

 

[Lanefan]

I'm truly staggered by how many of you don't use experience points and just level 'em whenever.

I use 'em, but not quite by the 1e book; the changes:
- dropped experience for treasure
- put in a "dungeon bonus" for finishing an adventure or completing a mission
- rejigged the advancement tables (generally sped them up; if I used the 1e tables as written they'd bump once a year if they're lucky, now they bump a couple of times a year with steady play - which is still intentionally very slow by many people's standards it would seem)

But I also kept some things, of which by far the most important is this: if a PC did nothing in a given situation to earn experience then he doesn't get any for that situation. Period. And this is my beef with "level 'em when it suits" DMs: you're rewarding those who do nothing just as much as those who stick their necks out. Having played with players who would take shameless advantage of this were it possible, I'll never support it.

A player can be absent and their character can and will still earn experience provided it does stuff - the remaining players run it.

Lan-"hand over all your experience and no-one gets hurt"-efan

 

[pemerton]

Lanefan, I think your post captures the biggest difference between AD&D XP and 4e XP. AD&D XP really is a reward for doing stuff. 4e XP is just a way of pacing the character development element of the game (which is why it can be so easily replaced by "level whenever" - whereas that sort of approach would make a mess of AD&D).