Experience Point: Keeping Score

I’ve all but stopped giving out XP in my games. I mean, I guess that isn’t entirely true. My last couple campaigns have been Savage Worlds games and I assign XP at the end of the sessions based on how much I feel we got done that night. Some evenings our gaming group tends to chat about work and families and computer games and sports. Some nights you can tell we need time to chat, vent, or share. When we eventually get down to gaming it can mean the session is shortened. I generally give out less XP for those sessions.

Maybe what I mean is I don’t calculate XP. I can recall the heady days of yesteryear when we’d tally up how many kobolds got slain, how much loot was gathered, and what magic items were found. Arcane formulae were applied to derive the magical number of treasured experience points we would receive. These were added to the former total and everybody held their breath waiting to see if the math would grant them a new level for their character. Remember those times when you came up just a handful of XP short?

I love Piratecat’s stories about “Peeps for EPs.” Apparently it was common for the players to bring candy and other treats to the gaming sessions. Around Easter somebody brought several packages of Peeps. A good number of them were not eaten and then became lost behind some gaming books on a shelf or something. A LONG time later they were unearthed during an archeological expedition among the dusty bookshelves (cue Indiana Jones music) and comments were made about how edible they might be at that point in their shelf life.

At the end of the gaming session, a player came up just shy of the number of experience points needed to gain a level. Piratecat contemplated their predicament and offered that, if they would consume one of these stale, months-old Peeps, he would grant them the needed XP. The player did this and their character got their level. I don’t recall if the player survived or not. It’s not the most important part of the story.

But it goes to prove that, for some of us anyway, XP are a really vital part of the game. It is, literally, how we keep score. And over the years I’ve done it in a lot of different ways; some dictated by the game system. I played Rolemaster for 12 years and its XP system has levels of complexity unrivaled by most games I’ve seen. Another game, Powers & Perils (which will always have a special place in my twisted heart), tracked XP separately for every single skill your character had! A friend and I even devised our own XP system that we used for 3e D&D-- it was kind of popular around ENWorld for a while.

Then one day I woke up and discovered I really did not give a crap about XP at all. We were spending quite a bit of time calculating and applying it to the individual characters. It was raising questions about what happened when a player couldn’t make it to the session. It was occasionally even causing some minor hurt feelings when it seemed that certain activities were being rewarded at rates different than some players preferred. I took a deep breath and chucked the whole thing.

I decided to do what a lot of other GMs have done before me and just have the PCs advance in level at a rate that had nothing to do with experience points. Notably, I opted to have them gain a level every three sessions. It was simple; we stopped thinking about XP and simply focused on the game, story, and fun. It was a huge success. We discovered none of us really cared about keeping score using XP. It was remarkably freeing.

Not too long ago I discovered that this same notion applies to life in general. My wife works in the healthcare field and was working in a private clinic. It was often the practice in their office to double book patients. The therapists would bounce from one to the other. Some of her co-workers would beam with pride and say, “I saw 14 patients today!” My wife would come home to me beaten and miserable and say, “I saw 14 patients today.”

How is it that some employees there loved it and felt a huge sense of accomplishment from their work while my wife hated it? Because they were keeping score in completely different ways. Those other folks liked seeing their productivity numbers up high like that, and they liked the pay bonuses they would get as a result. My wife on the other hand felt she was having to subdivide her attention too much and wasn’t giving good patient care. She was much less concerned with how many people she helped and more concerned with how attentive she was to each patient.

I’m happy to report this knowledge allowed her to seek out a job doing home-health care. As a result, she sees only one patient at a time and her focus can be completely on that person the entire visit. Furthermore, these are people so debilitated that they can’t leave their homes to get help at a clinic. While under my wife’s care they are able to progress to the point where they are ambulatory and can get out and about. That is a huge kind of progress and gives her an enormous sense of satisfaction about what she does. Same kind of work. Different method of keeping score. And it makes all the difference.

I see this in my own career change as well. My former business as a videographer was not personally fulfilling. It was using almost none of my strengths and I felt no higher purpose in doing it. So the only good way I had of keeping score was the money I made doing it. I focused on that a lot, often sitting there in the middle of a job mentally calculating how much money I was going to make from it. Bleah. Closing that business at the end of the year was a happy, happy moment for me.

The work I do now as a coach is FULL of the kinds of gratification I seek. What I love most is helping people. As a result, I’ve minimized the money aspect. The client pays me once at the start of the coaching and then I never have to think about it again. I don’t spend any of my time with my clients thinking about how much money they paid me. I don’t have an accounts receivable. I spend zero time doing collection calls. All my focus is on aiding them and that’s exactly how I want it. That’s how I like to keep score.

Do you track XP in your games? Is that an important way of keeping score for you? How do you track whether you are succeeding in life?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

In my 4e game I stopped giving out xp and simply told my players when it was time to level up, usually after completing an 'act' in an adventure.
However because some of them enjoyed tracking xp, I told them after encounters how many xp I used to create them.

Usually the level up before they'd have accumulated enough xp, but sometimes they lag a bit behind. Typically, the later encourages them to concentrate on their goals, so it's all good.

I don't track my success (or lack thereof!) in life. I get along and I'm happy doing what I do most of the time - what more could I ask for?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

We've been using the E6 variant of Dnd for my current campaign... and the PCs have just reached 6th level. I have always been very loose with giving XP because I find it a nuisance to track, and my PCs were always either lagging behind where I wanted them to be for the next adventure, or they were getting too much XP and out-leveling their current one. So I have taken to just giving out what I feel is appropriate as DM to keep them positioned where I am comfortable.

But E6 is fairly specific about advancement after 6th level; one feat per 5,000 xp. So, what will I do? Just decide semi-randomly when they've reached that goal, or give them a feat at the end of every other adventure they go on, or will I track XP carefully? I suspect I will track carefully for 1-2 feats, and then go back to handing them out when it is thematically appropriate.
 

But E6 is fairly specific about advancement after 6th level; one feat per 5,000 xp. So, what will I do? Just decide semi-randomly when they've reached that goal, or give them a feat at the end of every other adventure they go on, or will I track XP carefully? I suspect I will track carefully for 1-2 feats, and then go back to handing them out when it is thematically appropriate.

I would just keep doing what you have been. Instead of awarding levels, you can award feats to the party.
 

XP is a fairly useless stat to appease the kind of players I don't enjoy at my game, that is players who feel that there's some need to be better than the other players. It (and initiative) are stats that take a cooperative game and force some type of competition between players.

The OP has it right, it is for keeping score. Why in the world is anyone keeping score in a game where EVERYONE is on the same team. It's like a basketball player making a point that his individual goals outway hte team. There is already score in games, its called the moving of the story, the saving of the town the beating the big bad. If you lose any of these, you fail, doesn't matter if you are 5 points from leveling.

It has no basis on the actual character, the actual character's "power" is measured in levels. XP is the equivalent of having kids in the backseat asking you "are we there yet" and you the dm giving them constant updates on what hashmark you are at.

Unless XP is equivalent to some in game functionality (Ive had friends who converted it to wealth and to rebuilding a small town), then I"d rather adults behave like adults at my table and just level when the adventure or their progress deems it appropriate.
 

I've gone a step further in my game. My players tell me when they've leveled up, then they level up together. All I do is salute and build next session's encounters with a bigger budget.

PS
 

For D&D Next, I'm using experience points, because it's a playtest, and I'm trying to follow the rules as they are written. But I generally ignore experience points and level players when an appropriate number of adventures/sessions have been completed.

Of course, there are games where you advance particular stats by spending your experience points. I still use XP (or Karma or Hero Points or whatever they're called) in those systems...
 

I've got two games that wind up with different reasons why tracking XP is important.

One is a Star Wars Saga Edition game. In SWSE, your Force Points are a resource that refreshes when you gain a level. It then becomes rather important for players to know how far through the level they are, for gauging the use of the resource. Our first couple of levels we vastly underused them, as we didn't realize how close refresh really was. I don't know how much work the GM is going thorugh to calculate them, but he doesn't vary awards by individual.

My Deadlands game doesn't use D&D XP. The players draw Fate Chips at the start of the session. Fate Chips can be spent to alter die rolls and to absorb wounds, and occasionally spent to use special powers. If they aren't used for any of those purposes, they can be turned in for Bounty Points - and Bounty points are what you spend to improve or buy new skills, and such. By this mechanic, I don't have to actually track them much at all. No calculation on my part is required. I just watch how their skills go up, and what that implies for the game as a whole.

I do not try to track whether I'm succeeding in life. That is a fool's errand. I don't think XP measures life-success, so much as character advancement, which is not the same thing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

It is all about what you want to reward. If the play experience is intrinsically rewarding, that makes XP less important. But putting a lot of thought into what makes a character level is worth it because this is a key way of making a player motivated to accomplish things. There are alternatives, but it seems wasteful to discard a useful lever.
 

It's player-oriented in the same way that the entire game is player-oriented. Or, if you prefer, it might be player-oriented, but I do 95% of the work, and I determine how much they get, when they get it, and what they do that's worth getting it. And what the XP is worth. It's entirely the DM's purview. One can pretend that the points are objective and analytical, but unless you're playing a CRPG, they're not and pretending otherwise is just fooling yourself.
I don't agree, I think if you're running a dungeoncrawl where all the obstacles and treasures are either pre-placed or randomized, which not coincidentally is the type of game that D&D was when XP was developed, then XP can be awarded objectively. Furthermore I think if you're mostly doing that, and only sometimes violating objective placement, it's still good enough to count. Perception is reality: if the players feel like they've earned their XP, then they did. Objectivity is a means to that end.

I'm not familiar with the RPGPundit or the term "swiney", which would seem to be either a typo ("Swingey") or similar to "piggish", in which case it's kinda rude. In either case, I've found a lot of correlation between how people play games and how they are in real life.
Swine. It's not the most polite term but I think the concept is legit: people who have been playing RPGs for a very long time have a tendency to repudiate "gamey" rules like XP as a sort of status-climbing, self-validating gesture, which is annoying because it makes RPGs look more serious and inaccessible than they are.

I don't have any problem with people not using XP in their games. I think most of the time they drop it for a good reason. It's just when they say or imply that because they don't use XP they're nobler, less competitive, more enlightened, or somehow better than people who do that it gets swiney.
 

I don't agree, I think if you're running a dungeoncrawl where all the obstacles and treasures are either pre-placed or randomized ... then XP can be awarded objectively.
Basically, if you take the DM out of the game except as a person to read the booklet.. And furthermore, if XP is only awarded for objective, concrete goals, rather than role-playing. D&D might have started out that way, but it's been eclipsed by CRPGs.

Swine. It's not the most polite term but I think the concept is legit: people who have been playing RPGs for a very long time have a tendency to repudiate "gamey" rules like XP as a sort of status-climbing, self-validating gesture, which is annoying because it makes RPGs look more serious and inaccessible than they are.
No, it's not the most polite term, and reading RPGPundit's definition of it makes it worse. It's belittling, deprecating, inherently judgmental, and intentionally denigrates the target by labeling them an animal associated with filth, greed, and foul manners. By doing so the user seeks to generate an image of themselves as nobler, more enlightened, and better than the people to whom the label is applied. That's hypocrisy. And rude. It's name-calling.

Also, and this is totally off-topic, he and I go into total disagreement at the second sentence, and nothing after that is even mildly redemptive, so he doesn't carry any sort of authority with me.

I don't have any problem with people not using XP in their games. I think most of the time they drop it for a good reason. It's just when they say or imply that because they don't use XP they're nobler, less competitive, more enlightened, or somehow better than people who do that it gets swiney.

Well, I don't have a problem with people using XP. There are games where XP is a vital part of the system, for mechanical, structural, or conceptual reasons. If I were running a hard-core, 3d6 in order, dice fall where they may, kind of game, I'd use XP. But I'd do so recognizing the fact that XP is largely subjective and that it's part of my job to go through the pantomime that it's not to generate a sense of achievement and accomplishment in the players. Are they bad players? Heck no. Would it be a "bad" game? Heck no. As long as everyone is having fun, it's good (and this is where I take quite a bit of issue with RPGPundit and his valuation of "fun").
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top