Unearthed Arcana WotC's Mearls Presents A New XP System For 5E In August's Unearthed Arcana

I have to say...not terribly impressed with this month's article...

http://media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/downloads/UA-ThreePillarXP.pdf

I think my thread should be closed. So I repeat myself here:
Streamlined and probably very useful. I think level 1 and 2 should get an accelerator. Should be considered tier 0 probably.

 

[SerHogan]

You're probably right...

That's odd... I can't imagine that at all. Because I don't think a DM that would give XP for something like that actually exists.

Sadly, there are players that would. Many of them play in my group.

 

[ninjayeti]

It seems like you could accomplish the same thing more easily just adding xp awards to the existing system:

Explore a location/influence an NPC below your Tier - Award XP for defeating an Easy combat encounter
Explore a location/influence an NPC at your Tier - Award XP for defeating an Medium combat encounter
Explore a location/influence an NPC above your Tier - Award XP for defeating an Hard combat encounter

As with Mearls' initiative variants, he is offering a complete rewrite of the system when a simple tweak would achieve his goals just as well.

 

[Ancalagon]

Totally unnecessary. If you didn't subtract XP, then you'd simply have 920 XP and be 9th level; you'd reach 10th level when you hit 1000 XP.

The subtraction is redundant and adds no value unless you add in other elements, such as requiring a certain percentage of XP from each pillar in order to level up.

It's because 1 XP = 1% of a level. By having your XP "reset" at every time you reach a new level, you keep that XP as a percentage feature.

BTW, I think that 100 XP per level is really a nice level of granularity. 10 XP per level is too "coarse", but I'm not sure there would be value in having 1000 or 10 000 or whatever XP per level.

I am honestly considering switching to this system - probably tweak it to slow/quicken level progressions, but it seems good to me.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

It's because 1 XP = 1% of a level. By having your XP "reset" at every time you reach a new level, you keep that XP as a percentage feature.

You'd keep that anyway, using modular arithmetic. 920 XP = +9 levels, and +20% of the next level.

 

[Harzel]

I have always given XP for exploration, and I have been shifting toward giving quite a lot of XP for goal accomplishment. I might reduce or eliminate XP for combat (except as it contributes to goal achievement), but some of my players would have to make a system shock roll to survive that.

So w.r.t. the proposal

• I like (a lot) the direction of giving XP for exploration and social "accomplishments".
• For me, 100 XP / level is too coarse-grained. (Just personal preference; probably reflects the same impulse that would lead me to ditch d20 in favor of d100 for a lot of stuff if d20 weren't so iconic.)
• Mapping difficulty/challenge to tiers is also too coarse-grained for my taste.
• I don't like the 'meaning' of 1 XP changing across levels. (Again, just personal preference as it can be seen as just a reskinning.)
• And XP for treasure? No, just no.

Summary: Mechanics 6/10; Aesthetics 2/10. No ideas here that I would use that I didn't already have.

 

[Shasarak]

Its better then milestone leveling I guess.

 

[R_Chance]

Milestone levelling is fine if you play adventure paths (imo) but not as much for a sandbox game of adventure, exploration, and combat. I prefer XP for that reason. I have added XP for exploration by giving challenge ratings to new areas the PCs enter (including cities!). More dangerous = more XP. The players have to spend a certain amount of time moving through / around the area. I've considered adding XP for social challenges but that's more difficult to judge (again imo). Anyway, I've always felt the journey with it's new sights and experiences should be worth experience. And those peasants who never leave the area of their village don't get it. Very medieval idea there

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

It seems like you could accomplish the same thing more easily just adding xp awards to the existing system:

Explore a location/influence an NPC below your Tier - Award XP for defeating an Easy combat encounter
Explore a location/influence an NPC at your Tier - Award XP for defeating an Medium combat encounter
Explore a location/influence an NPC above your Tier - Award XP for defeating an Hard combat encounter

Nitpick: note however that there is no canonical award for defeating an Easy/Medium/Hard combat encounter. A Hard encounter for four level 6 PCs ranges from 3600 to 5599 adjusted XP, but the actual XP earned and awarded could be anywhere between 300 XP and 20,000+ XP. On the low end, thirty bats who surprise you while you are climbing an underground cliff face in the dark are 300 XP, x4 for there being thirty of them which makes it just barely Easy, plus one difficulty level for surprising the party, plus one difficulty level for being favored by the environment (immune to falling hazard, immune to darkness), for a final rating of Hard. On the high end, an ancient black dragon is 33,000 XP, which is Deadly at this level, but if the party surprises the dragon while it's sleeping that bumps it down to Hard, according to the DMG.

Anyway, I think you're kind of missing the point. We've all experimented with different ways of handing out XP, whether by giving out extra XP for fighting multiple enemies at once, or giving out XP for treasure, or something else. This UA is about tailoring the XP system on the requirements side to suit your campaign goals. What you see as unnecessary complication is actually the whole point of the exercise.

 

[dwayne]

pretty close to what I have always done as a GM but nice to see someone else thinks along those lines.

 

[guachi]

I always use XP, and in 30 years of gaming, I've never once heard someone ask if anything was worth XP or kill things just to gain XP. Different player culture I guess.

Same. Though I've played D&D for 20 years vice 30 (1983-2000 and 2014-2017). Precisely zero times have I ever heard someone ask if a monster was worth XP or not. The closest I've had that I can recall was recently where the players absolutely knew this particular location wasn't where they needed to go to find something but went anyway because it sounded fun.