How do you calculate XP?

[Sam]

Been looking over my shiny new 3.5DMG, and they've changed the way XP is cacluated and distributed to players.

I've been calculating XP by deteriming the Average Party Level (APL) and then looking up the CR of the monster/NPC on the table, dividing the result by the number of players. (I add one to the APL if the number of players is over 5). This way, everyone in the group gets the same amount of XP if they all took part in overcoming the challenges.

The new DMG says to calculate the amount of XP for each PC/Monster encounter separately, so that for each PC, you look up their level and cross reference to the CR of the monster, then divide by the number of PCs.

My group has some variety in the level distribution. Lowest level player is 6th, highest is 9th (nearly 10th). I calculated XP using both methods. Under the old method for last night's gaming session, each player (before role-playing adjustments) would have received approx. 2800 XP. Under the new method, the two 9th level players get about 850XP and the lower level players get between 3k & 4k Xp.

I'm kind of on the fence here. The group overcame a bunch of CR 1 monsters (16 human fighters, 6 gnolls, 7 troglodytes), and it really wasn't a tremendous challenge for the 9th level mage to fireball them into oblivion. But under the new system, the 9th level characters get no XP for the CR1 creatures, while the level 6-7 guys get 200/#ofPCs each. This will serve to balance out the party faster (which is desireable), but I'm concerned that the higher level characters will start to feel cheated.

So, what do you think of the new method, and, how do you calculate XP for your game?

 

[Bagpuss]

Although I'm not using the 3.5 books at all from what you have discribed that's the method I've been using for experience for some time. The players don't seem to mind as they know it helps the lower party members to level quicker and therefore is good for the whole group. Sooner the cleric catches up with the rest of the party the sooner he has access to more useful spells, etc.

 

[d4]

i agree with Bagpuss. anything that helps the lower-level characters in the party catch up is a good thing.

it can be quite frustrating to be a lower-level PC in a party of higher-level characters, because you begin to feel like you can't contribute as much as the others.

on the other hand, being a higher-level PC in a party of lower-level characters can also be frustrating, because the other party members don't have the ability to back you up as much.

i've been playing in a campaign where my PC is about two levels ahead of just about everyone else (due to untimely character deaths and missed sessions on the part of others), and the DM just instituted this change. i'm all for it. the challenges we're facing are mainly encounters balanced for a party of my level, and having everyone else a level or two below that is making it really hard. i want everyone else to catch up with me as soon as possible.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

I use a mix of the 3.5 XP stuff and story awards.

 

[MythosaAkira]

I've been using the 3.5 method for awhile, as I adopted it from the FRCS. There was a little grumbling from one of the players when we switched from the "standard" way, but I think it's more equitable overall.

Of course, on top of the standard XP awards I usually tack on a little more for story/role-playing/etc. on an individual basis.

 

[Fenes 2]

We don't use xp anymore, just level up from time to time when we feel like it. Before we just had story xp - basically, the DM awarded flat xp to the party after finishing an adventure, not so much based on the "difficulty" of the adventure but on the rate of advancement he desired for the campaign.

 

[orbitalfreak]

I use the method from 3.5. This was the method introduced in the FRCS, and I switched to that style when I saw how it benefitted lower-level characters and helped them catch up.

 

[Wombat]

XP for killing critters is more or less based on the 3.0 rules, but everything else is free form. The more dangerous the situation, the more in-character the response, the more important the act is to completing the mission, the greater the number of points. Convincing just the right guard to let you through can be worth a lot of points; killing just the wrong one can gain you a few points and a helluvalotta guards chasing you to your doom.

One of the most important aspects we have in our game is the Roleplaying Point. If someone does something really cool and totally in-character, there is a call of "Roleplaying Point!" from one of the other players (or GM) -- that person adds one whole XP, but a lot of folks in the group relish those points more than anything else now.

We also try to keep treasure down to a dull roar. Rather than having hordes of gold and magical trinkets, we allow "credit" with various temples to either create items or "level up" items already in your posession. Makes for a lot of fun -- also means there isn't a "glut" of +1 and Masterwork weapons on the market

 

[Blacksad]

a Mix of DMG 3.0 and story awards

Mainly because any disparities in level came from absenteeism.

If disparities came from level drain or resurection I'd switche to 3.5 plus story awards.

 

[Christian Walker]

I find the xp awards in 3.0 (and I assume the same goes for 3.5 ) to be far too generous. While those who designed the game tinkered with the system until it would produce 20th level characters, that is not my style of play. Therefore, I roughly halve all xp awards. Slow growth it is.