Help make my DM see the light....
- Thread starter DarkJester
- Start date
Ealli
First Post
One way to blunt the counter protests is if all the healers to be the other players who agree with you. Then, refuse to heal anyone unless you get the experience from the combats they were injured in (if it weren't for me, you'd be dead and without experience). Make bards and clerics and then if they hit and/or kill solely based on your buffs, demand the experience (if it weren't for me, you'd have missed and not made the kill). And failing that, return to your highly efficient characters and when they get angry, tell them that individualistic experience isn't your idea, talk to the DM, but try to only tweak those who are for the individualized experience.
Best of luck.
Best of luck.
MythandLore
First Post
This argument is flawed, they reason he gets xp is to balance the game in a simple manner.DarkJester said:
They would have had to create a more complex (and likely unbalanced) xp award to accommodate things such as the gaining of xp for casting healing spells etc, let alone spells like detect magic, this would have been a waste of everyone’s time and in the end the game would have suffered far worse then the streamlined relatively simple xp rules used in 3rd edition (one of the major improvements over 2nd edition)
The current version is not made so it can be balanced with another set of xp rules.
That’s why they are the rules.
Changing them runs a major risk of unbalancing the game system far worse then anyone claims it already is.
Of all the different problems that 3rd edition has (as any game does) the new xp system is not one of them.
Unbalancing the game could (and likely will) damage its playability.
If it’s not playable the game becomes less or totally un-enjoyable.
Bottom Line: Don’t mess with the rules.
This is true, but he can play by the rules.DarkJester said:
If he wants to run the game, he should run the game.
But run it right.
If this problem continues, and you can’t come to some kind of compromise that doesn’t damage the way the game is played, then maybe it would be best if you didn’t play with him.
That’s what happens when the blind lead the blind.telepox said:
EOL
First Post
Do the three players who agree with him benefit more than the other four from the per kill experience?
Also Darkness has a very good point, if he gives experience to the person that dealt the killing blow that has serious problems. I remember running a campaign where a low level party was fighting a hill giant. One fighter went toe to toe with the giant and ended up rolling a couple of criticals and took the giant down to 10% before he dropped. The other fighter fumbled and lost his weapon, by the time he recovered it fighter 1 was just about to drop, Fighter 2 comes in does the last few hitpoints of damage and drops it. Now, as I understand your DM's system Fighter 2 would get all the experience even though fighter 1 did all the damage and took all the damage.
Also Darkness has a very good point, if he gives experience to the person that dealt the killing blow that has serious problems. I remember running a campaign where a low level party was fighting a hill giant. One fighter went toe to toe with the giant and ended up rolling a couple of criticals and took the giant down to 10% before he dropped. The other fighter fumbled and lost his weapon, by the time he recovered it fighter 1 was just about to drop, Fighter 2 comes in does the last few hitpoints of damage and drops it. Now, as I understand your DM's system Fighter 2 would get all the experience even though fighter 1 did all the damage and took all the damage.
reapersaurus
Explorer
My wild guess would be that he doesn't understand the CR and EL system.
How exactly does he award the XP?
If there are 7 PC's (or is it 6 PC's?), does he take the CR and your avg level into account?
Or does he just say... this creature is CR 4 and Grog, you killed it mostly, and you're level 4 so you get... XXX X.P.
Tordek, you also helped, and you're level 3, so you get YYY X.P.
How exactly does he award the XP?
If there are 7 PC's (or is it 6 PC's?), does he take the CR and your avg level into account?
Or does he just say... this creature is CR 4 and Grog, you killed it mostly, and you're level 4 so you get... XXX X.P.
Tordek, you also helped, and you're level 3, so you get YYY X.P.
arcseed
First Post
Heh. Any group I've been in, if we'd had this sort of experience system, we'd have been figuring out how to maximize everybody's levels by sharing experience around rather than complaining about certain players advancing faster than others. Or maybe working on getting certain characters critical levels as fast as possible. (like level 6 for the sorceror)
Frankly it sounds to me like you have a bigger problem, which the experience system is just one manifestation of. Namely, that half your group would prefer to play d&d as a competitive, gotta-beat-the-other-players game, rather than as a cooperative shared storytelling game.
That said, the experience system does suck, and if you want to keep playing with your friends, you should try to change it. Ask the players who prefer the current system if the normal system really does make the game a lot less fun for them. I'd suspect it doesn't, or certainly not as much as the current system kills the fun for the rest of you. And that should make it a pretty simple choice.
If that doesn't work, I wouldn't really want to continue playing with that dm, and possibly those three players, if they really don't care about how they're killing my fun. I'd find something else to do hanging out with my friends. And voting with your feet, particularly if you can get the folks who agree with you to do it too, might make the rest see reason.
YMMV, and I really don't know how much of an issue this is with you. But if you find you'd rather be doing something else while hanging out with these guys, then you probably really oughtn't be playing.
Frankly it sounds to me like you have a bigger problem, which the experience system is just one manifestation of. Namely, that half your group would prefer to play d&d as a competitive, gotta-beat-the-other-players game, rather than as a cooperative shared storytelling game.
That said, the experience system does suck, and if you want to keep playing with your friends, you should try to change it. Ask the players who prefer the current system if the normal system really does make the game a lot less fun for them. I'd suspect it doesn't, or certainly not as much as the current system kills the fun for the rest of you. And that should make it a pretty simple choice.
If that doesn't work, I wouldn't really want to continue playing with that dm, and possibly those three players, if they really don't care about how they're killing my fun. I'd find something else to do hanging out with my friends. And voting with your feet, particularly if you can get the folks who agree with you to do it too, might make the rest see reason.
YMMV, and I really don't know how much of an issue this is with you. But if you find you'd rather be doing something else while hanging out with these guys, then you probably really oughtn't be playing.
Aaron L
Hero
So, a mighty battle with a dragon insues. The warrior stands toe to toe with the dragon, stabbing it with his sword. The wizard throws fireball after fireball, inflicting more damage than even the warrior. The cleric keeps the fighter alive with his healing spells. The rogue waits the entire combat, sneaking around to get a good flanking position, and after 15 rounds sneak attacks for 30 points of damage, and lands the killing blow with a small amount of damage. The rogue gets all the experience and rises 3 levels. Great system, eh?
This system will end up with a character getting lucky early on, getting all the experience. He will then be higher level then the others, and get the experience because he is more powerful and kills more things. It will spiral from there, and you will end up with a party with 1 15th level character and 3 3rd level characters.
Besides, let him know that the XP system is designed to be split among all participating characters, typically a party of 4. If he insists on awarding killing blow XP, then he should divide it all by 4. See how the players who used to like the system like it then
If they still want to play that way, I would say they were all idiots and leave them for another game.
This system will end up with a character getting lucky early on, getting all the experience. He will then be higher level then the others, and get the experience because he is more powerful and kills more things. It will spiral from there, and you will end up with a party with 1 15th level character and 3 3rd level characters.
Besides, let him know that the XP system is designed to be split among all participating characters, typically a party of 4. If he insists on awarding killing blow XP, then he should divide it all by 4. See how the players who used to like the system like it then
If they still want to play that way, I would say they were all idiots and leave them for another game.
1StrangeFellow
First Post
Okay, I find myself unable to be diplomatic about this or mince words:
That has got to be one of the most idiotic house rules I have ever read, mostly for reasons everyone else has stated. Kill more monsters, gain more levels, get better at killing, get even more experience and leave everyone else in the dust, unbalance things further. Lather, rinse, repeat. What the heck! Let's reduce roleplaying to its least common denominator! Why doesn't he just host a game of Diablo on his computer? And you only get experience for killing something? What a wonderful, imaginative and productive way to spend the day!
Those players that are in favor of this moronic idea obviously must be benefiting from it the most. I'm strongly in favor of withholding your character's services as someone suggested above. Go on strike. Form a Healers' Union or Spellcasters' Union. Not really, but you know what I mean. The idea that you can't increase in ability unless you kill something sounds like a bad episode of the Twilight Zone... ending with a civilization of corpses.
That has got to be one of the most idiotic house rules I have ever read, mostly for reasons everyone else has stated. Kill more monsters, gain more levels, get better at killing, get even more experience and leave everyone else in the dust, unbalance things further. Lather, rinse, repeat. What the heck! Let's reduce roleplaying to its least common denominator! Why doesn't he just host a game of Diablo on his computer? And you only get experience for killing something? What a wonderful, imaginative and productive way to spend the day!
Those players that are in favor of this moronic idea obviously must be benefiting from it the most. I'm strongly in favor of withholding your character's services as someone suggested above. Go on strike. Form a Healers' Union or Spellcasters' Union. Not really, but you know what I mean. The idea that you can't increase in ability unless you kill something sounds like a bad episode of the Twilight Zone... ending with a civilization of corpses.
Ravellion
serves Gnome Master
It is extremely silly indeed. All the things that should have been said have been said (as pertaining to game balance), but the most important thing is you are not having fun, you are spendng what should be a fun night with the guys bickering about what should be an intangible metagame mechanic, instead of spending the game in-game!
Rav
Rav
