Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="the Jester" data-source="post: 5879188" data-attributes="member: 1210">Ohhh, I see now!Okay, now I can make intelligent comments on this!Overall I think it's problematic for at least two reasons.Reason 1 is that the same creature might be a fine threat on its own against a 1st level party (say, a bugbear) but might need numbers to face off against a 4th level party (say, 4 bugbears).Reason 2 is that, if you start changing the xp a monster's worth based on circumstances, where do you stop? Are undead worth fewer xp if you have a cleric? Does a wolf pack earn a party of druids and rangers fewer xp? What if the party just uses good tactics?The "undead vs. cleric having party/non-cleric having party" is probably honestly a bigger determination of the difficulty than "one kobold/three kobolds together", IMHO.I think there's less to gain than the hassle this system adds, personally. The minion/standard/etc. division works well because it's designed to be used per encounter; in a per adventure xp budget, I think the xp system itself needs to be set to work without tons of circumstantial fiddliness. Otherwise, it's just a pain in the butt for very little gain. I think a better solution is a general dm's guideline in the "Awarding XP" section or equivalent; "If you feel that the circumstances of an encounter make it especially easy (such as the pcs being able to hang back atop a cliff and fire arrows at melee-only enemies), you can reduce the xp award... similarly, if the circumstances make it especially hard (the pcs are sailing over a lake of fire in a cramped boat that it's easy to fall out of and are attacked by flying enemies), feel free to increase it."</blockquote>

Verification