How do you handle Experience Points?

[was]

start with equal xp across the boards but there are bonuses for great role-playing

 

[Savage Wombat]

I use individual EXP according to the rules system, and (since I most recently ran Pathfinder) I feel kind of bad about doing so. As described in other threads, it seems kind of pointless if you're running an adventure path.

I think I have an irrational attachment to the old way of doing things.

 

[trancejeremy]

I think a lot depends on what sort of game you are running.

If XP is mostly combat based, you'll get a lot of combat. Many people like combat, so it makes sense for those games.

If it's more exploration based (like treasure for XP), you'll get more of exploration, less combat, since fights won't be rewarding (unless there is treasure involved). So for sandbox games, this is the best.

Personally, i don't like leveling by GM fiat, because it takes player agency out of the equation. Why do anything? You'll level the same. Might as well play it safe. But then it's mostly a plot/story based game, where combat (or level) isn't that much of a factor most of the time, then it works okay.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Personally, i don't like leveling by GM fiat, because it takes player agency out of the equation. Why do anything? You'll level the same.

Are we to understand that given the presence of experience, that is the reason (or at least a salient reason) why players act?

I don't see that at all. I've seen a lot of players who look at XP as a joke. They're coming to the game for other reasons than that; maybe for something to do with plot or character, maybe something to do with the tactical side, maybe just for the social aspect.

And, in any case, I wouldn't look at experience as a venue for player agency. As written, it's pretty much an after the fact reward for things that are already inherently rewarding (accumulating treasure or killing monsters) and which would presumably happen pretty frequently regardless of the players' choices.

 

[Lanefan]

Individually awarded all the way; mostly for combat, some for exploring, interactions, new experiences, etc.; and a dungeon bonus at the end of each adventure. You (as character) get involved, you get x.p. Stay out of things and you don't get x.p. It encourages players (as characters) to stand in - this is very intentional on my part as both as plaeyr and DM I detest characters who stand back and let others do the heavy lifting (and dying). Awarding group x.p. all the time actually encourages this type of play as even if you stand back you'll still get the same x.p., and be able to loot your dead party members as well!

My game also has variable advancement rates by class, and occasional level loss, so the party's never all the same level anyway.

Lanefan

 

[Meatboy]

At the moment its RAW for me. Though im playing a very harsh old school style ATM where gaing levels is the reward for playing well and death, and starting again at level one, awaits the unwise or unlucky.

when playing a more story focused game I use the level when appropriate model.

 

[ExploderWizard]

For D&D play, most of the XP comes from treasure. XP is also awarded for encounters faced (no matter how the encounter plays out.) and for completing player selected quests. XP is awarded equally to all members of the party who participate, no matter how they divide up the treasure. I don't award individuals for "good roleplay" or certain activity because I don't want the game to devolve into an XP fishing competition.

I like to award the most XP for treasure because it is a very playstyle and class neutral reward mechanism. Seeing how the players can come up with ways to aquire more treasure with less risk and effort is a very fun part of the game.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I do a cross between 'all PCs get the same' and 'level up when the DM says'.

I tend to calculate the amount of XP my combat encounters give out and use that as a baseline for each session. However, I don't spend any time whatsoever figuring out what any of our "roleplaying" parts of a session are worth in terms of XP. I just guesstimate it based upon what the players did and how important the session was to the overarching story. Everyone who was there gets the XP from any combat plus X amount of experience points for the roleplaying. If you weren't there, you get 0 for the session.

I keep track of what each session was worth in XP (so that I have a better idea of what future sessions should be worth) and then add them all up for the PCs to figure out when they level up. Usually it defaults to about a level up every three or four sessions (which, since we play biweekly, is every couple of months assuming the player has attended all the sessions.) And If I find that what I've given out in XP is going to make someone level up after like just 2 sessions, or not level up after like 5... I will add or subtract XP to a session so that I maintain the 3-4 session level up scenario.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Even as unscientific as we know these polls are it's interesting that no matter how the question is worded or when it's asked, "no XP" always seems to poll at a little under 50%.

 

[Remathilis]

Pretty much standard: In 2e I did group amounts + individual awards based on class and play (the 2e variants in the DMG). In 3e, I went with the standard 3e system for a while (with the LA-based variant in the FRCS) until Unearthed Arcana, when I switched to the static XP variant (which saved me a lot of redoing the same math 2-3 times). In my limited time in 4e, I used its system and in Pathfinder I use its system.

However, I've played under a couple DMs who did the "level when you feel like" method in d20. The problem was they rarely gave the level-appropriate treasure and then tended to use monsters 2-8 CR above our level. One DM complained how "every fight I have to fudge the dice rolls" after having level 13 PCs with level 10 treasure (because that was the level we rolled them up to) fighting CR 18 monsters...