Individual XP

Stormborn

Explorer
In the last game session I had a 6th level ranger go into a seedy bar on his own while exploring a city (the other PCs were busy with something else at the time) he was hostile and insulting, just waiting for a fight to start. In the end he took down four warriors and experts. They never even touched him.

So, my question is, do I award XP as if a 6th level party had faced a ECL 3 encounter (which is what it would have been as they had different levels in various NPC classes) or should it somehow be different?

At the time I awarded him a few hundred XP (which he was somewhat suprised about, he only wanted the 150 or so he needed to level up) but was unsure as how to handle XP for a single character facing an ECL of 1/2 his level or less.

Am I missing something? Or anyone know the best way to handle this?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

If he picked the fight for a metagame reason (wanting that extra 150 XP) I would not award him any XP whatsoever.

Additionally, I would hesitate to reward PCs for consciously 'creating their own challenges'. So even if it wasn't a metagame reason, I would only award XP if the fight took a turn that the PC did not except.

I might award XP for creatively explaining the city guard how this fight could have happened, for example.
 

I concur with Philip: no XP should be awarded if this was done for metagaming reasons.

Alternatively, give him the XP, but if "taking down" his opponents means killing it may mean that the authorities are after him. Send him to prison, make him an outlaw, give him a fine, etc.

There ain't no such thing as a free lunch (or XP).

Andargor

EDIT: Those NPCs probably have friends. Perhaps powerful friends. Make the group pay for that character wanting to cause trouble solo, and you shouldn't see this kind of behavior again.
 
Last edited:


What they said.

Normally (without the metagaming stuff), I would award him seperate XP (the others, too), if only individual PCs were present at an encounter, this only makes sense.

Bye
Thanee
 

I agree with the others although I myself probally would have awarded him some XP - until reading this post that is. I would have given him 1/2 the XP award for a lvl 6 fighting a CR 3 due to the circumstance of him starting a fight to level up.

I wouldn't fret about him "taking advange of you" or the like from him getting a few hundred XP. In the end, what is a few hundred XP when it takes 10,000 to level? What I'm saying is I wouldn't take away the XP he earned, however shady that was. No need to give a player against you. Not to imply that one of you has a grudge and whatnot.
 

In Game Complicated Explination: The character in question recently consumed the heart of a black dragon. This has resulted in some hightened senses and will eventually lead to other changes in the characters physiollogy. The player later explained to me that he felt like it was appropriate for the PCs behavior to begin to change as well. I agreed.

Metagame Explination 1: This person,although having roleplayed for a long time, isn't the type to really creates things for his character to do. He goes along with the party, but adds almost nothing to the roleplaying aspect. Meanwhile the other two players have these complicated back stories, relatives, and love interests that give me plot hooks galor. I was thrilled that he went and did anything.

Metagame Explination 2: I have been trying, subtely, to encourage the PCs to explore their new home city, but the others have been involved in their own little subplots that I haven't gotten lots of results, or unsatisfactory ones. So, while he didn't really do what I expected, as they never do, I wanted to encourage texploration in the future.

Its interesting that most people have taken my question as somehow critical of the act itself; I wasn't asking how to deal with the character or the player, all I was asking was a straight forward XP for CR question.

Respectfully, I don't see why you wouldn't reward players for creating their own challanges, given that they also suffer the consequences of those challanges. They should be able to create the kind of situations they want to play. If you go around picking fights to get a rep or whatever one day you will pick a fight with some one bigger and nastier than you. Or someone with connections (as may happen in this case.) How is going into a bar and startign a fight different than looking for the nearest dungeon and starting a fight there?

In fact the other players have created their own challanges, things I thought either a bad or dangerous idea, but I let them go through with it and bear the rewards and benifits. One character went alone to see her half-brother, a powerful agent of a rogue city state ruled by the PCs enemies. Her own idea, not my instigation. I even suggested that he might try to send her home "for her own good" out of game. She went, he tried. She survied a fight with his numerous but low level household guard (another reason for my original question) and got away with the aid of a main NPC and another PC. Another character started studying some spell books he found in a cultists' lair, almost died from the backlash of a dangerously evil and poorly knownspell, has become invovled with a guild of occultists, and has recently taken on a tattoo that identifies him as a member of such. Even though he knows the Inqusition is looking for unsanctioned magic users, and he and his allies might actually need the support of the Church at some point in the future.

IOW, I am fine with the PCs doing stuff like that, knowing that it would have consequences. When the time comes I can easily get them back to my metaplot. In fact everything they have done lately, although not what I had planned, will serve all the better when the time comes.

And BTW the bar was the hangout of a Teamsters-like guild, so there will be in game reprocussions. And considering that this particular nation is run by the merchants and the guilds, that can be saying something.
 

Seems to me that you guys are responding to metagaming, with metagaming. Sometimes that is necessary, but not in this kind of situation.

No one has asked what sort of game this group is playing (and note that the original poster only asked for the rules in the situation, not how he should respond to the metagaming of his player).

The rules answer to his question is that there is some vagueness in the rules. Normally you would award XP for a 6th level party facing creatures with the CRs as appropriate (note that ECL is tool for balancing encounters, not awarding XP), however, a normal party is four characters, not 1. This means that you should adjust the total award up, based on how much more difficult you think the encounter was.

However, I agree that in my campaign, actions such as these would have repercussions, ranging from fines to arrest, and possibly including far more insidious punishments. For example, if the PC had busily been building a friendship with someone local, this might ruin, or at least setback such efforts.

Roleplaying actions should be met with roleplaying responses.
 


Personally, I side-step the whole issue by never awarding individual XP. Each member of the party gets equal share, period. (Gaming and spending time with friends is the reward.) It prevents the metagaming stuff like your Ranger did... It also prevents people from feeling slighted/insulted, which has happened in every game I've seen with non-consistent XP.
 

Remove ads

Top