Just had a thought about xp

[Baron Opal]

I'm going to be altering the way XP is gained in my Eberron campaign this winter. Basically, everything will be goal-oriented; if the group needs to get a vital document from a nobleman's study, their largest reward will come when that piece of paper is in their hands.

That isn't much different that the RAW, is it? Overcoming obstacles vs. achieving goals?

Personally, I've gone to a system where the party levels at the number of sessions equal to their level +1. After three sessions of being second level they level to third. I'm not sure what I'm going to do for those that miss a session. Given that we game about 4 hrs every two weeks that should do it nicely, particularly with a level bump after reaching some goal.

 

[LonePaladin]

Actually, the RAW give XP for only two things: defeating monsters and dealing with traps. Nothing else has a Challenge Rating, which is what's used to determine XP awards. Sure, some published adventures include 'ad hoc' awards, but I'm turning my game into nothing but. The only time I'm giving XP for killing a monster is when the PCs must kill that monster to achieve a goal.

The DMG suggests story awards, and recommends reducing monster-based XP in half if they're being used. I'm just taking it to the other extreme; eliminating monster XP and doing 100% story.

I considered doing away with XP altogether, and just having the PCs level-up at appropriate times. This didn't last long, though — my fiancee had left my current game several months ago, and she recently told me it was because she didn't feel that she was getting rewarded for some of the excellent roleplaying she had done (no lie on her part). Basically, the main thing she saw as a reward for those efforts was additional XP — and the chance of advancing in level sooner — while I've just been giving out standard monster/trap awards.

If I continued to grant XP by the book, or — even worse — simply had everyone advance in level at the same time, with nothing visible to them, she would drop out again, probably within a session or two.

 

[Baron Opal]

I see.

Well, calculating xp is such a pain in the ass that I've long since given up on it. If it went back to straight addition, with some bonuses here and there for strange situations, I would go back to it. Otherwise, predictable leveling is the way to go for me.

Of course, it isn't all that predictable for the players since I haven't precisely told them yet.

 

[LonePaladin]

I would strongly recommend telling your players about it, and getting their opinion on it, long before you adopt that strategy. If you remove XP altogether, the players may feel that all they have to do is show up, participate a little, and make sure their character survives. It encourages wallflowers, and removes a sense of achievement. You also take away the one gauge they have as to how close they are to actually advancing, since the only figure they can go off of is whether or not you feel they've done enough.

Also, if you remove XP completely, you will have to rework the item-creation rules, as well as spells with an XP component. (Yes, I know, they're getting rid of those ideas in 4E.) If the players can't see how much XP they have, they have no way of knowing if they can use any of these abilities — and if you just allow them to be used without cost, don't let your PCs get to 17th level, or the clerics and wizards will be casting wish and miracle until everyone's got a permanent +5 on all stats.

 

[Baron Opal]

If you remove XP altogether, the players may feel that all they have to do is show up, participate a little, and make sure their character survives. It encourages wallflowers, and removes a sense of achievement.

Good points, however I have other markers of achievement than xp. Standing in their house, strength of their bloodline powers*, vile relatives imprisoned, &c. I have no wall-flowers; ambivalence becomes it's own punishment when the other character's goals and standing in the game / community stagnates. Also, we hang together with our families on off days so only those who really want to game are at the table. There are other social outlets for the disinterested.

Also, if you remove XP completely, you will have to rework the item-creation rules, as well as spells with an XP component...

True, I have had to do that. Scrolls and potions take so little xp anyway I just waived that cost. The material and time cost has been sufficient to prevent any abuses there. For wands and anything permanent, I charge hero points. Off the top of my head I think it's been 1000 xp to the hero point. That's been enough to have the magicans think about whether or not they really want to craft something. I'm kind of waffling on the wands as they are charged items.

* Not Birthright really, more of a Dune- Nine Princes in Amber- Eberron themed mix.

 

[shilsen]

I would strongly recommend telling your players about it, and getting their opinion on it, long before you adopt that strategy. If you remove XP altogether, the players may feel that all they have to do is show up, participate a little, and make sure their character survives. It encourages wallflowers, and removes a sense of achievement. You also take away the one gauge they have as to how close they are to actually advancing, since the only figure they can go off of is whether or not you feel they've done enough.

I definitely agree with the first sentence, but I think the rest of it depends on the group. Personally, if the main reason my players participated actively in the game was because of the XP they'd receive, I'd quit DMing. As a player, I participate in the game because it's fun to participate in the game, and as a DM I try to run a game where it'll be enjoyable to take part because of what's going on, not because of any XP you might receive from it. I also prefer to have the sense of achievement come mainly from in-game events and actions, not from the gaining of XP.

 

[Umbran]

So on a dungeon crawl whose goal was to exterminate goblins, you got xp for slaying monsters, but on an adventure whose goal was to drum up money, you got xp for gp? And for an adventure whose whole point was diplomacy and interaction, you got xp for roleplaying?

What do you think?

I think this would be better stated as "XP earned for story goals". I've seen several games run with this type of variant.

 

[LonePaladin]

I definitely agree with the first sentence, but I think the rest of it depends on the group.

Yeah, I forgot to add that caveat. If your players are cool with it, by all means go for it. The people I've gamed with over the years like seeing that number, even if they only use it to gauge how close they are to advancing again.

My fiancee, in particular, likes to see rewards for good roleplaying, even if it's nothing more than an additional XP reward. In my next campaign, I'll be putting more emphasis on roleplaying anyway, and making sure that they get rewarded in other manners (such as in-character recognition, the ability to call in favors, that sort of thing).

In addition to changing the way I hand out XP awards (i.e., less emphasis on killing things), I'm changing how they keep track of it, though it doesn't really change things. Essentially, when they increase in level, they have to 'spend' XP equal to 1,000 × their current level. This simply means that the XP total they have written down is the amount over what they needed to make that level, so they won't have to deal with a large number at any time, and can easily see if they can spare any for spells or item creation. (One of the PCs will be an artificer, so XP costs will be a big deal for him.)