XP award: I need help!

[Ancalagon]

Hello

We have been gaming about 3 times a month, 8-10 hours each session, since a month or 2 after 3e began.

We just reached level 7. To me, this seems like pretty slow, and I'm starting to wonder if the DM is doing the XP awards right. I mean, it is perfectly within his rights, as DM, to do advancement however he pleases. However, he claims he has been following the DMG pretty closely. I've had discussions about this with him, and I think there is a problem. However, I want to make sure (we are keeping this very civil) so I thought I would ask others.

The point of contention is this. We have a large number of PCs (7). He claims that this is the cause of slower xp award, and from what he seems to be saying, it seems we are being penalised twice. I'm not going to speculate more about his ruling, because I may be interpreting it incorectly. Now, I'm going to make a very simple example, and I want you to tell me if MY interpretation of the rules is correct.

Party A is made of 4 characters, each level 4. They meet an ogre with a gnoll side kick who are extracting a ridiculous toll to cross a bridge, and after a brief battle, kill them.

Now, acording to table 7-1 of the DMG, the group should earn 600 xp from the ogre and 300 xp from the gnoll (total 900xp). This will be divided in 4 (because there are 4 PCs), for a total of 225 xp each.

Is the first part of my example correct. If no, why?

Party B is made of 8 characters. They encounter the same situation and kill their foes. The XP award should be again 900, but this time divided by 8, for 112 xp each

Is this example aslo correct?

Now, if the DM thought, after reading the module "hmm, one ogre and one gnoll is not enough to chalenge party B, so I will put 2 ogres and 2 gnolls", the xp award would be doubled, and the party B would make the same amount of XP as party A.

Is this also correct?

I thank you in advance for your help,

Ancalagon

 

[turtle]

yes

 

[Kae'Yoss]

You seem to advance pretty slow. We're playing for half a year now, Usually every week (although there are 6 or so sessions that were cancelled), usually 4 hours. And we're level 10 (and likely going to level-up next time).

OK, we're only 3 characters +DM, our DM is generous and we are fighting quite frequantly, but your awards still sound pretty little!

As you're a level 7 party, you'd get monster XP according to the 7th-level column of the tables, just as a "standard" 4-char-party, only that you have to share it among 7 players, not just four.

Are there many battles in your campaign? Are those challenging battles? (one CR 7 monster maybe a normal challenge for a 4-player-party, but your party should need two such beasts in order to be challenged. You should even be able to fight 7 such monsters, though that would be a close call. but for a standard party, that would be certain death).

Tell us some details about your campaign (play stile, how you rolled your ability scores etc...) so we can better imagine what would be the norm for the campaign.

Also, there's always the consideration that XP awards are designed in order to make the standard party level up every 13.3 encounters. Make that 3 to 4 encounters per game session, two sessions per week, and you should level up every two months. Now considering that you play 3 times a month, not just twice, and you're playing 6-8 hours (I think that the usual is 4-5) and you should be able to level up once a month (it should not matter that you're 7 characters instead of the standard 4, as a challenging encounter for you consists of more monsters, which in turn give you more XP). And those considerations don't even take XP awards for roleplaying or adventures into consideration (and those are pretty common).
So, I'd call it normal if you advance twice over the course of 3 months, or 8 levels a year. So if we assume that you started the campaign in october 2000, you had about 18 months of action and should be around level 12. I'd consider everything below level 10 slow, maybe even to slow.

 

[rushlight]

I've been running a game for a long time, and we converted to 3e just after it came out. My party is usually 5 or 6 people, but we have had times with as many as 8 or 9 players.

Now, I run a slightly higher powered campaign, so I'm a bit more generous with XP, but there are some things your DM could do to fix the situation.

First, he is in fact correct that you average the PC levels to find the Party level according to the book. I've found that this isn't adequate for game balance. Since (for example) 4 level 5 people are a Party Level 5, the average battle will take place with a CR 5 creature. Now, if you take 8 level 5 people to fight the same CR 5 creature, then the XP will be the same as before, but divided by 8. The reasoning is since there are more people (than average) the encounter is easier, thus less XP per person.

The solution is to increase the Party Level when the number of players goes above 4. I usually split the number of players into blocks of 4, average those Party Levels out, and then sum them to find a rough Large Party Level. Looking at the Encouter Level chart in the DMG (not the XP chart) will also provide simple guidelines. Not only will it increase the amount of XP per person, it will increase the challenge of the encounters, and thus the fun!

One thing to remember, though, is that this is not an exact science. The DM must be careful not to over-estimate the party's combat ability. That can lead to quite deadly situations.

 

[Cabalan]

Possible cause?

Our gaming group made a serious error when we began 3e. Instead of giving XPs for every monters, we calculated the EL of an encounter and used the EL for determining XPs.

This way 8 CR 1 creatures (EL 4) would give 1350 XPs to a 1-3rd lvl party instead of 2400 XPs...

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Re: Possible cause?

Our gaming group made a serious error when we began 3e. Instead of giving XPs for every monters, we calculated the EL of an encounter and used the EL for determining XPs.

This way 8 CR 1 creatures (EL 4) would give 1350 XPs to a 1-3rd lvl party instead of 2400 XPs...

First off, 8 CR 1 creatures make EL 6 or 7 (see DMG, p.101). That would be your 1-3rd lvl party 2700 or 3600 XP.

Also, if you encounter the very same 8 creatures at 9th level, you don't get anything if you give XP for each monster individually, while EL 6 would give you 900 xp at least (or 1350 if it's EL 7).


I personally think that rewarding for fights according to EL rather than individual CR is quite legetimate: In higher levels, it will give you at least a litte out of those mass battles, but not quite enough to make it to much, and in lower levels you'll get something back for the fact that you have to deal with numbers: Of course defeating a lamia (CR 6) is much more dangerous for your 3rd-level party than defeating a Orc Warrior1, but if that's 8 Orc Warriors, they could just seek out the weakest (or the next best) and bury him in a mount of flesh, fists and crude weapons (Such a thing happened to us, though we were only 3, but 5th-level chars, and it was at least 50 goblins that just overran us. )

 

[Ancalagon]

Greetings

Ok folks, we are not trying to determine if the xp award is "appropriate", we are trying to figure out how the official rules work! If the DM doesn't like it, he can change it as he wants, it is his right of course. Basicaly, your advice is skipping a step... step A is figuring out the actual rule, step B is deciding if those rules work well for the campain or not. I'm at step A. (although I apreciate the thoughfull coments)

So, in other words, are my examples correct, yes or no (and if no why?).

Ancalagon

 

[hong]

Your example is correct. If you have a party twice the size, then all other things being equal, you will advance half as fast.

 

[Geoff Watson]

Re: Re: Possible cause?

I personally think that rewarding for fights according to EL rather than individual CR is quite legetimate: In higher levels, it will give you at least a litte out of those mass battles, but not quite enough to make it to much, and in lower levels you'll get something back for the fact that you have to deal with numbers: Of course defeating a lamia (CR 6) is much more dangerous for your 3rd-level party than defeating a Orc Warrior1, but if that's 8 Orc Warriors, they could just seek out the weakest (or the next best) and bury him in a mount of flesh, fists and crude weapons (Such a thing happened to us, though we were only 3, but 5th-level chars, and it was at least 50 goblins that just overran us. )

XP for EL works out OK(or close enough) in most cases: eg two CR X monsters have an EL of X+2; a CR of X+2 is worth twice as much XP as a CR X monster.

Geoff.

 

[Magic Rub]

So let me get this straight. . . 2 year's & you've only gained 7 lvl's. That's insane!!!!! And boring!?!?!? Yes it is the "Right" of your DM to work XP however he see's fit, however as players if you all don't like the way he's doing something it is your right to protest. If he doesn't like your opinions as player's, then you don't have to play. It sounds like your DM has taken on to many players at once and can't handle you all properly and as such he has dropped your XP to slow your advancement & make it easier on himself. do you realise that you are averaging 1 level advancement every 92 hours of game of game play.

3 sessions per month X 9 hours (average you said 8 to 10) per session X 12 months a year X 2 years
= 648 hours of game play / 7 lvl's = 92.57142857 hours per lvl

That's 1 lvl (aprox) every 10 sessions, or 3 months in your case. Of course I realise that this is distorted way of looking at the average hr's/Lvl, but you get the point. That number is only going to get worse the higher you lvl's get. Even if your game involves HEAVY roll playing this is wrong. Your DM should be compensating you all accordingly Your situation is a sad, sad, sad thing. I wish you lived close to me so I could invite you to play with my group. Life is to short to only have played 1 D&D character.

"So this is what it sounds like when doves cry"