What would you do - xp award

[T. Foster]

Award the XP at the end of the adventure/mission rather than session-by-session, and make the primary determinant of the XP award how well the party accomplished the goal/mission and how much each character contributed to that accomplishment, consistent with that character's role. The per-encounter XP formula only works if the goal/mission of the adventure is "have as many encounters as possible" (just like the OD&D/1E XP-for-gp formula only works if the goal/mission of the adventure is "gather as much loot as possible") and if the goal of the adventure is something other than that then you're going to have to adjust the XP-awarding metrics accordingly.

 

[Lanefan]

I'd do it thusly:

The two in the fight get the ExP for the fight.

The rest who stayed put get nothing...and that *includes* the full-member NPC, who - if the 3rd PC does get any ExP - should get exactly the same. (the bodyguards and guide are a different issue)

Lanefan

 

[Greylock]

The third PC most definitely performed a role in the combat, even if not there for the blow to blow. It would be unconscionable in my mind to not share the XP reward. It should, as others noted, be awarded per session, not per encounter.

I won't get long-winded, but if I played for a DM who divvied up XP like that, I'd have something to say, and if it went unresolved I'd move on. It's a party based game. Everyone has a role. Now, if the player had sat at the table in a huff, and refused to take some part in the incident, say, deciding to run off and hunt game or such instead of guarding the NPCs, that would be different, but the player fulfilled his/her part. If that player had not been there, the encounter would not have happened in the same way.

 

[darthkilmor]

Well, giving everyone full XP would also tell the two players "Hey, it doesnt matter if we split up, we'll all get xp." or tells the one player "Hey, I dont have to risk my neck and I'll still get XP."

I'd give the players XP as you laid out 2366 & 1566, maybe give them all an extra 200 story XP or something. Sitting out 10 minutes isnt that big a deal. What if they were in the bathroom for 10 minutes, would you be having the same dilemma ?

 

[argo]

Well, giving everyone full XP would also tell the two players "Hey, it doesnt matter if we split up, we'll all get xp."

And what's wrong with spliting up if the scenario calls for it? Did the player in the full-plate design a scenario that called for stealth? No, the GM did. So why should the player be penalized for participating in the GM's scenario in the best way possible?

or tells the one player "Hey, I dont have to risk my neck and I'll still get XP."

What is this, work? We have to pay the players for their time? This is a game, we play because we enjoy playing. Not getting to participate is a bad thing, not a good thing.

 

[Shining Dragon]

I'd do it thus:

Don't have such encounters that award major amounts of XP.



Its not fair that any player has to sit out and watch others have fun, and then watch those players' characters leap ahead in XP and levels. If you keep doing it, then don't get surprised when every player ignores "what's good for the party" and ensures they're in on the encounter.

 

[Quasqueton]

Thanks for the answers -- the variance in advice is interesting.

Also, many people have commented that "the DM created the encounter that required stealth." This make for an interesting secondary discussion: Did the DM in this situation "create" the stealth encounter?

For instance, I did not intentionally create an encounter that required stealth. In fact, because I know the PCs are not particularly stealthy (I don't think anyone has any ranks in Hide or Move Silently), I did not expect any real "stealth scenarios". The Players [probably wisely] chose to use stealth in a scouting run, and I let them. Is the DM "responsible" for choices the Players make, even if he never expected them?

I did not expect, or want, the PCs to split up for a stealth scenario. In fact, later, the 3 PCs left the NPCs and went on a probing attack -- and I never expected or wanted them to leave the NPCs (without them, the party is weaker).

[I'll also mention that the party went on this adventure without mounts. I fully expected them to purchase horses for this scenario (so they'd have better mobility), but they surprised me there, too. A lack of mobility can really screw them in this adventure -- it's not a dungeon crawl, and they knew the scenario before they went to it. <shrug>]

Quasqueton

 

[Hussar]

I believe by RAW, xp is always divided equally. Works for me. Sometimes a given PC might not do something and get rewarded for it, true, but, in the end, it balances out. Maybe later on, the PC who sat back winds up doing more than his/her share.

In other words, I wouldn't sweat it a whole lot and just award xp equally.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

1What would you do? What would you suggest?

For the record, if it matters, the xp award for the one encounter was significant -- the 2 PCs would get around 50% more xp than the 1 PC would get: 2,366 vs. 1,566.

Then for the record it doesn't matter. In the long run the difference in xp should be insignificant as there should be times when the two "scouts" are absent and the remainder of the party must handle challenges of their own.

Award the scouts the extra XP and let it ride. It would only be a problem if it becomes a consistent pattern of activity and the same PC routinely is left behind to contribute nothing.

Edit: interesting to read the responses to this one. I believe that the XP system, while it reinforces homogeneity among PC XP totals, is not intended to MANDATE it. In other words, the XP system helps keep PC XP such that they remain close in levels over time. But it isn't supposed to just award the SAME xp to to everyone, every time as if someone is getting cheated if they don't. If consistently identical rewards were desired in the present system then there would be no bother with calculations of XP totals at all. Which is also why there are VARIANT methods of awarding xp - for those who disagree with the methodology of the XP raw.

AS WRITTEN, the players should get differing XP rewards and there's NOTHING desperately wrong with handling it just that way. XP is awarded for PARTICIPATION in overcoming challenges, even if roleplaying considerations keep them away from participating.

 

[Lanefan]

I believe by RAW, xp is always divided equally. Works for me. Sometimes a given PC might not do something and get rewarded for it, true, but, in the end, it balances out. Maybe later on, the PC who sat back winds up doing more than his/her share.

As someone else pointed out, however, this only encourages people *not* to take risks...the reward (at least in terms of ExP) will be there whether you take the risk or someone else does, so...let the someone else do it. I've had players like this, who - if they knew they'd get the ExP regardless - *would* intentionally hold their characters back and let others perhaps get killed, and only come in if-when it was safe. Once they learned that hanging your party out to dry does not earn you any ExP, things changed...at least somewhat.

With the risk comes the reward. If I was in a game where my character had taken all the risk in a given encounter (e.g. I was a scout and I'd single-handedly crept in to the enemy lair and out again to do some recon while the party waited at camp) I'd be bloody annoyed if the rest of the party got ExP for that, and as a player my next thought would be "why do I want to stick my character's neck out? If I get caught and killed while scouting, the rest of the party don't all lose a level/Con point on revival..."

Edit: MitFH, I agree completely with your edit, above.

Lanefan