Sleeping and silenced rogue, ouch...

[Lord Pendragon]

RE: Lord Pendragon
I think he is misrepresenting himself here. He doesn't really mean he would give less than full experience for the encounter. He means he would lower the Encounter Level (EL) based on these circumstances.

Scaling EL based on circumstances is appropriate. Obviously we don't all agree on when you should scale EL. But that's cool.

Exactly what I meant to say. Thanks for helping me pull my foot out of my mouth.

 

[argo]

This kind of situation is a minor reason (major reason - ease of use) that I award XP per session based on how quickly I want the party to level up. It has nothing to do with the specific challenges they overcame and how they do so. Awake griffon, sleeping griffon, arm-wrestling, dragon-slaying, getting drunk - all the same

Amen to that!

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Well played, Bastoche. I say full XP for you.

I think Pendragon's point is that a monster of CR n is not simply a walking bag of XP that you can look up on a chart. A monster is part of an encouter, a problem, an opportunity. It is the intrisic difficulty of the encounter as a whole that should give experience. The monster is just a piece of the encounter. Sometimes a very large piece, sometimes a small piece. You have to look a the whole situation. The CR of the critters involved are not necessarily as important as the exact situation.

A hydra that can be avoided by patience and some easy climb checks might be worth less XP than a handful of cowardly goblins that roll rocks down on you while you are skirting along that same steep canyon wall.

For such an encounter I would just split the difference. If you try the "brave" direct approach of killing a hydra you could have avoided, you get less than full XP. But that option is open to you. If you take the climbing route, your pride is more in danger than your life, but you will need to spend some spell resources to rectify the situation or rely on some skill checks. The CRs of the goblins are pathetic, but they are worth more (the same as the hydra in this case) because of the context.

It is a fine thing to allow the PCs the full benefit of luck and good tactics, but I do not like to see outright stupidity rewarded. I say set up the situation, give the PCs multiple options (some wiser than others), set the XP for the situation at one single number, and let them figure it out. But they should not get more XP for figuring out the most bloodthirsty means of solving a problem for the same reason they should not get less XP for finding an easy path through extreme cleverness.

 

[Darkness]

Regarding XP adjustments:

See "Modifying XP Awards (and ELs)," DMG, p.39.

Enemy asleep is probably "significantly less difficult" or "half as difficult," no matter how you ultimately overcome the encounter (murdering them in their sleep, bypassing them, etc.).

 

[Davek]

Just curious, but what about other senses other than sight and hearing? What about touch, ie. vibrations as the character clambers up into the nest? Not exactly tremor sense which is quite powerful, but even if they are moving carefully and invisible it doesn't mean that the nest doesn't move ie. branches moving slightly, stones shifting.

I like the party's solution so don't take this as a slam in any way, but I do know that when I am sleeping, even if I don't hear anything, if someone brushes against the bed, I wake up. Maybe it is just me

What type of roll would be most appropriate for this?

 

[two]

The Guilty Preaches to the Choir

I think perhaps I'm misrepresenting my "system."

I don't reduce xp for good tactics. I don't reduce xp if a combat goes easier than expected.

The last combat a ran--first in a new campaign--consisted of the 18 dex, Combat Reflexes fighter mowing down swarms of Tiny critters, since they provoked AoOs when they attacked. I hadn't anticipated the power of Combat Reflexes vs. Tiny critters, so the combat went much more easily than anticipated. I did not dock xp from it because of this, though. Nor would I dock xp from an encounter where the cleric easily destroyed a group of undead, or the wizard got lucky with a Disintegrate spell, etc. etc. I don't dock xp for excellent use of flanking, or Sundering, or disarming. I don't dock xp if the fighter gets lucky and scores a half-dozen critical hits.

But I do take a look at the initial setup of a combat, and adjust the EL for the situation. If the party is standing at the top of a 50' cliff and sees a Tyrannosaurus at the bottom, the EL for that encounter gets reduced. The T-Rex simply cannot respond to whatever the party does, and that makes the encounter far easier inherently, than a standard T-Rex encounter is meant to be to earn full xp.

And the scenario presented above, IMO, is not a standard EL griffon encounter.

I think you absolutely fail to take into account the nature of the "initial setup" of the encounter.

You make a very basic error in your reasoning, which is highlighted by your example of the TRex at the bottom of the cliff.

If a party is walking down a road, peeks over a cliff, sees a TRex at the bottom, and decides to attack, it could be very bad for the TRex. One movement-hindering spell, some arrows, fireballs, etc. and the TRex is dead without any danger to the party. This is a true example of a fight with a drastically lowered EL. The party might gain very little XP from the "encounter", which nobody would much argue with. All it cost them was a few spells and arrows.

HOWEVER.

What about the situation where the party is told a TRex is maurading a village etc. The party could charge in and pull a hack-fest on the TRex, and if they win get full XP for simply charging into battle. On the other hand, they decide to be clever. They use illusion spells and summoned creatures to lure the TRex into a canyon; use a movement hindering spell to stop the TRex from leaving; and then kill it from the cliff above with summoned monsters/arrows/spells/whatever. Again, the party has little chance of being hurt, and the end result (TRex a sitting duck to ranged attack) is the same. However, in this case, the party GETS FULL XP. Absolutely. No question.

Why?

What is the difference between the two scenarios of the "sitting duck TRex?"

Well, in the first, the party just stumbled upon the TRex who was having a very bad day. The "encounter" started with the TRex at the bottom of the cliff/canyon/whatever. The encounter level is low because of the situation: the party has all the advantages, and did nothing to gain them. So, not much XP.

In the second scenario, the encounter started long before the TRex was at the bottom of the cliff/canyon. In fact, it "started" the moment the party heard about the TRex and decided to do something other than a hackfest. The party spent time and spells to lure the TRex into an ambush; had to make clever decisions and use stealth/other means to do so; had to have things go right to some extent. And, when they do, the TRex is a sitting duck. But the EL is not lowered because of the situation, because THE PARTY PLANNED AND USED RESOURCES TO CREATE THE SITUATION.

That's the key difference.

The Griffon encounter is no different.

The Griffon "encounter" actually started far before the sneaky rogue whacked 'em. It started with the Griffon not being able to spot a party that put a premium on stealth/hiding, and which had some good spot bonuses which saw the Griffon in turn. Most parties are not stealthy like that. Those that are get rewarded. So the party knows there is not 1 but 2 griffons. After spending some spells/resouces, they pinpoint the nest. After spending more spells/resouces, they get their rogue invisible+silenced and able to crawl up the cliff. By the time the rogue gets up the cliff, the sleeping Griffons are in a world of trouble. But it wasn't just bad luck. It wasn't the Griffon's fault. It was, rather, due to the planning and makeup of the party itself. You absoluely MUST reward parties for not doing the stupid hack-n-slash thing.

I mean, c'mon people! If the party had just loudly tromped up to the Griffons, allowing the Griffons to ambush then and start a long battle -- which the PC's eventually win, say -- the party would be kicking and screaming if any XP was withheld. It was a 'fair fight' after all, by the book. Full XP. That's if the party is completely lacking in any tactical flair.

So what do you do with a party that is sneaky, clever, plans, spends resources on "invisiblity" and "silence" instead of SMII and Scorching Ray? Of course, you punish them for putting the Griffons in a bad spot and easily taking them out.

That's a good plan. Will surely make for wonderful game play in the future.

To repeat: THE ENCOUNTER STARTED DAYS BEFORE THE GRIFFONS DIED.

To repeat: DO NOT REWARD BUMBLING HACK-N-SLASH MORE THAN CLEVER PLANNING.

I can't tell you how overjoyed I would be if my players managed to kill a roomfull of orcs due to planning and a clever use of spells/stealth/etc. It would be wonderfully refreshing, and quite exciting too. Will the orc guard get "silenced" before he can cry out? Can the party avoid a trap without making noise? Will the orc cook smell them coming down the corridor? Will the silence web spell get most of the low-reflex save orcs stuck fast? Will the subsequent attack kill the orcs without the PC's losing a single hit point?

Please, for the love of all that is holy, don't PUNISH PC's and parties for being smart!

Full XP for the Griffon killings. 100% absoutely full. Personally, I would even give a bonus to the party for not doing the stupid thing ("we rush up the hill towards the nest loudly").

*if you still don't want to give full XP consider all the party resources that have been used*

-- Silence spell
-- Spider Climb
-- Invisiblity
-- Investment in + to hide cloaks
-- Skill investment in hide/spot
-- Fly spell + Invis to scout

That's a lot of resources for this relatively low-level party.

Plus there is the danger that one of the Griffons might luckily wake and chew on the solo rogue. It's not without danger -- but the danger is minimized. Because of the party's efforts.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

I think you absolutely fail to take into account the nature of the "initial setup" of the encounter.

Good for you. As I stated upthread, I feel no further need to justify my EL adjustment judgment. My group seems happy with the way I adjudicate xp, and I'm sure yours is happy with yours.

Good gaming.

 

[two]

Good for you. As I stated upthread, I feel no further need to justify my EL adjustment judgment. My group seems happy with the way I adjudicate xp, and I'm sure yours is happy with yours.

Good gaming.

I'm not asking you to change your way of thinking (entirely), merely consider it from the player's point of view. And also to consider the larger game play issues.

As a player, I'd be a little bit annoyed if my party spend a lot of time and effort to construct a "deadly ambush" and, when it goes off as planned, have the GM "reward" good planning (and non-standard resource useage) with a lower XP award.

This tells the player: Don't bother with things like scouting, stealth, plans, and excellent use of unusual spells. Just stick to the script, walk up to the monster, and start bashing.

As a GM, I try to go out of my way to reward outcomes other than hack-n-slash, "let's just charge in", "goooo getttt 'eeemm!!".

The reason I take a hard line on this issue is because people are always complaining about "hack-n-slash" type players, mentalities, i.e. don't think too hard just kill it.

If you have a XP system in place that actively discourages and in fact punishes players from doing anything other than the most obvious straight-on attacks -- well, where is that going to leave you in the long run?

Thinking about the Griffon example:

If the party is given 50% or 25% of the normal XP for killing 2 Griffons -- what lesson has been taught to them, collectively, as a party?

1) If you want to gain experience, even for a party that uses stealth and sneaking a lot, the best way is not to use stealth and sneaking (because this is punished). Obviously this makes a LOT of sense. To get better at sneaking/hiding, simply attack in the open without a coherent plan. OK. Up is down.

2) It's better to kill things using attack spells than utility spells (invisiblity, silence).

3) Don't think outside the box. Stay in the box. Far in the box. Might as well not bother with utility spells, actuallly, much at all. Just blast everything.

That's a little bit of an exaggeration -- but not much.

You simply can't punish the party for being clever like this. It's just setting a horrible precident and pushing the party to do the most boring thing in the world.

See monster?
Run at monster.
Attack monster.
If you survive, full XP.

[repeat, repeat, repeat]

 

[dagger]

All the groups I game with would give full xp for this situation as well.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

The Griffon "encounter" actually started far before the sneaky rogue whacked 'em. It started with the Griffon not being able to spot a party that put a premium on stealth/hiding, and which had some good spot bonuses which saw the Griffon in turn.

I would certainly agree. That is why I would award full XP in this case.

My take on the initial setup is that the griffons were quite likely to spot a normal party before the party spotted the griffons.

Hide of a typical Fighter in MW plate + MW shield: -5
Hide of the clumsiest member of this party: +7

The griffons were an easy kill because of the unusual stealthiness of the party. That was an opportunity earned by resources invested.

Now this same party is in real danger when you throw a few ghouls at them because they do now have a normal tank fighter. No need to feel sorry for them after what they did to those poor griffons.