Level Up!

[Riastlin]

No-xp games don't have to be episodic. I'll grant you that I'm running my first no-xp game right now, so I can't speak from experience, but even if you want to run a free-form type game, you can run an xp-less game by just deciding amongst yourselves when it's time to level up. So maybe your players decide to divert to Emmerson lake, they do some exploring and some good deeds and maybe clean out an evil cultist temple or two, and then ding, time to level.

Oh, I agree completely, the DM doesn't have to choose episode conclusions for levelling up. My point was though that players who want to metagame will find a way to metagame, and if the "level ups" seem to occur at the conclusion of episode arcs, then the metagamers are likely to act accordingly.

Just as DM's who use no XP systems do not have to make the levelling mechanic episodic, DM's who do use XP need not award XP for every fight, social interaction, etc. In the latter case, when the party says "Hey, we only need like 300 XP to level, lets go look for stuff to kill in the forest before we enter that dungeon" the DM doesn't have to award XP if he feels that the players are just metagaming in order to gain their new abilities before entering into the the Dungeon of Ultimate Dread.

In other words, metagaming sucks from the DM perspective, but its pretty difficult to completely prevent it. Heck, just tell the players that one of the monsters is casting a spell and odds are that even those groups who don't metagame much are likely to jump all over the caster (at least in my experience) who cares if said caster actually has anything useful to offer to the fight.

 

[pauljathome]

I've been thinking about the pros and cons of accumulating experience versus being awarded levels, and I am having a hard time thinking up very many pros for the former.

There are a couple of advantages

1) You can bribe players for roleplaying, campaign journals, helping with the dishes, attendance, whatever
2) It lets you start new characters slightly lower than current characters if you want. They'll eventually catch up a little due to the experience being "worth more" at lower levels

That said, any Game I'm gm'ing I just go the "level when I feel like it" route.

 

[ffy]

Another reason to use XP is to encourage desired behaviors. If XP is awarded for monster kills, players are encouraged to seek out and kill monsters, and if you like running "dungeon hack" games, that could be exactly what you want. 1E awarded XP primarily for treasure found rather than monsters slain, which encouraged more sneakiness and cunning. I've seen some DMs hand out an "MVP bonus," where all the players vote on who's the "most valued player" for the session and that person gets a bonus award, thereby encouraging teamwork and cohesiveness. And of course, there's the old standby of not giving any XP to people who don't show up to the game.

i agree with using xp to encourage desired behaviour. especially if you let them know after slaying a room full of orcs that its not the killing they are getting xp for, but for getting past that obstacle in their path. they could have got just as much xp for sneaking past them or talking their way through.

with how many different rewards the DM can give out in 4e, i feel its not necessary to actually give out xp points to make the players feel as if their character is growing (before leveling up). xp is more of a DM tool for rewarding awesomeness (you get 50 extra experience in this fight for that awesome <very imaginative move here>!) than for the players.

as an inexperienced DM i havent run into a player who is trying to 'beat' the game, so i am asking this. regarding the metagaming players, if a player knows the following:
1) how many encounters it usually takes to level up
2) they are a small amount of xp away from leveling up
why cant the DM just make them understand that instead of trying to run around slaying random things, or finding a random encounter, they should continue acting in character and not worry about finding enough xp to level up, since the DM has already placed it in some place in the world for them to find anyway? is it pure humanly greed ('i am so close, i HAVE to get it NOW!!') or are they trying to get an edge over the DM-controlled monsters by leveling up that drives them to do so? because it seems that removing xp would probably fix the problem in both scenarios. in the first case it would implicitly tell them that they will level up when the time is right, and in the second case it would eliminate their ability to try to get an edge in levels.

 

[Goonalan]

I award XP RAW, not because I think its right or because I do everything RAW but because I actually like the maths- all players get the same XP however, so no one levels at different times.

I also give XP for good roleplay, although I equate good roleplaying (particularly when the roleplaying has a set goal- to find something out for instance) as a Skill Challenge and award XP in line with how difficult I think the challenge is.

I also award XP for character development, so last week Drake (the Cleric of Pelor) gave a sermon at the House of the Sun in Fallcrest- with all the other PCs helping out- cheering, chorusing their approval, using cantrips (and an everburning torch) to create additional effects which wowed the audience.

I'm not that generous with the XP however, I don't like quest reward XP- the PCs level every 5 or 6 sessions at the moment, and this seems to be working well, we play every week.

I've pretty much plotted out the PCs progress to level 20 in my head (and the next few adventures on paper), I don't mind if the PCs level up because it takes me very little time to level up an encounter- I always make notes about how to make each individual encounter either harder or easier (usually 1 level up and down), so it takes me no time to adjust, same for if a PC fails to show for a game.

I don't think my way is better, I just like doing it this way- a lot, I like the maths, and the not knowing what the exact level progression will be- keeps me thinking about how to design future encounters to challenge the PCs, keeps me looking for new tricks and twists.

I've never experienced the we're nearly up a level let's go kill Orcs phenomena in 4e, although that may be because of my 10 players (two groups), only one of them (I think) actually knows how many XP they need for the next level- most of them don't pretend to care, they just like playing the game...

Cheers Goonalan

 

[Rune]

I would play in a game that only awarded XP for Quests, though.

This is how I do it: Two major quests, or one major quest plus two minor quests, or four minor quests completed equal a level. Since I run sandbox style games (for the most part) my players do not lack for quests to accomplish at any given time. This puts the emphasis squarely on the story and takes it off combat, but still allows enough flexibility for the players to determine the direction of that story.

 

[DNH]

This issue crops up every now and again and I am pleasantly surprised to see just how many DMs have dropped tracking xp, as I have.

One thing bothers me though: those of you who still award xp, you all mention things like "bonus xp for good roleplaying" or good ideas, paying attention or even attendance. Now, I have done all of these in the past but not since 2e. Thing is, 4e (and 3e) have all character classes progress according to the same xp numbers. Everything is balanced now (supposedly) and so a 7th-level wizard is at the same xp total as a 7th-level fighter or rogue or what-have-you. If you award bonus xp here and there, surely you would end up with characters at different levels (although I admit you might have to go some for this to happen)? I dunno, you might conceivably have one character at Level 6, three at Level 5 and one trailing at Level 4. But having different-level characters in your party in 4e is actually a bit of a pain, as the encounters are supposed to be keyed to a certain level. Work it for the average and that could mean that the Level 4 character toils to be effective and risks death all too quickly, and/or the Level 6 character sails through the encounter like it's a cake-walk (excuse the mixed metaphor).

Maybe I am making a mountain out of a mole-hill but it seems to me that this is just another argument for levelling characters by DM fiat rather than xp tracking.

 

[Dausuul]

One thing bothers me though: those of you who still award xp, you all mention things like "bonus xp for good roleplaying" or good ideas, paying attention or even attendance. Now, I have done all of these in the past but not since 2e. Thing is, 4e (and 3e) have all character classes progress according to the same xp numbers. Everything is balanced now (supposedly) and so a 7th-level wizard is at the same xp total as a 7th-level fighter or rogue or what-have-you. If you award bonus xp here and there, surely you would end up with characters at different levels (although I admit you might have to go some for this to happen)? I dunno, you might conceivably have one character at Level 6, three at Level 5 and one trailing at Level 4. But having different-level characters in your party in 4e is actually a bit of a pain, as the encounters are supposed to be keyed to a certain level. Work it for the average and that could mean that the Level 4 character toils to be effective and risks death all too quickly, and/or the Level 6 character sails through the encounter like it's a cake-walk (excuse the mixed metaphor).

Well, it presents a challenge in 4E because 4E's "rubber band effect" is weaker than in previous editions. 3E adjusted XP awards by PC level, enabling lower-level characters to catch up over time. In AD&D and BECMI, there was no such adjustment, but the cost of advancing doubled every level*, so a level's worth of XP difference at level 2 became a trivial amount at level 8.

In 4E, the XP curve is much shallower and there's no adjustment by level, so a difference in levels would last a while and a character who consistently got less XP would fall farther and farther behind. You'd probably need to institute some kind of "catch-up rule" where anybody below the average level of the party would get bonus XP until they caught up.

However, I think you're exaggerating the effects of level differences. A level 6 character is not that much stronger than a level 5--power scales much more slowly in 4E than it did in 3E. I think you could have PCs up to two levels apart adventuring in the same party without it being a big deal.

[size=-2]*Up to level 9-12 or so.[/size]

 

[Jhaelen]

My players initially signalled disappointment when I told them I'd no longer grant them xp and simply let them level up whenever it made (story) sense.

I compromised by telling them after completing encounters and quests how many xp the party would have received.
This way they have a means of measuring their 'success' as we proceed and compare if they did well, i.e. if they managed to level up before collecting sufficient xp or not.

I think, this approach may actually help them even more to focus on achieving their goals instead of getting side-trecked. This may not be a positive thing for every group, but in our case it's certainly good, since we meet so infrequently (about once a month).

 

[Stumblewyk]

The discussion in this thread has inspired me. I've pitched going XP-free to the group for our upcoming Dark Sun campaign.

I don't like the idea of having to cram 10 or so encounters/skill challenges/quests down my player's throats per level in Dark Sun. I want the emphasis to be on survival, building a network of allies, hiding from enemies, and exploration - not killing x number of baddies per level.

I'm waiting on their response. As a once-a-month group, I've taken a very democratic approach to houserules. If we're not nearly all on board on a potential change, I don't want to implement something that will make people unhappy during their only gaming session that month. =/

 

[wedgeski]

I could never take XP away from my guys, they love receiving it, and they love the excitement of closing in on the next level (just one more encounter!). I've made one concession to XP tracking which is that we essentially have party XP, not individual XP; so, every reward is a reward for everyone.