XP awards in D&D 3.5
- Thread starter Trainz
- Start date
Ranger REG
Explorer
That's not right.
In any case, I've been using the FR method.
In any case, I've been using the FR method.
Mouseferatu
Hero
Trainz said:
I'd very much like to see the math on this, if you don't mind. I don't see how that's possible--especially since the chart in question gives values for a 4-person party of roughly the same level, not for individuals.
Mouseferatu
Hero
Oh, I see how you did it. "Average party level 5.5," what with 10 +1 = 11; 11/2 = 5.5.
However, I'd say the logic doesn't work there. Number one, the CR system assumes characters of more equal power. Second, I don't think a 1st level character would factor into the battle at all, numerically. Like it says, parties that are more than 8 CR away from the creature; I think that logic applies to adding PCs as well.
Bottom line, I don't think it's a problem in the system so much as an excessively literal interpretation of the letter of the law, rather than the spirit.
However, I'd say the logic doesn't work there. Number one, the CR system assumes characters of more equal power. Second, I don't think a 1st level character would factor into the battle at all, numerically. Like it says, parties that are more than 8 CR away from the creature; I think that logic applies to adding PCs as well.
Bottom line, I don't think it's a problem in the system so much as an excessively literal interpretation of the letter of the law, rather than the spirit.
Such "problems" make me glad I never used CR-XP tables. Much less hassle if you just eyeball what amount of XP you want the PCs to receive for their actions instead.
Edit: That goes double as soon as you have to eyeball the tables anyway if there were special conditions of an encounter that should raise or reduce the CR - at that point you are just guessing anyway.
Edit: That goes double as soon as you have to eyeball the tables anyway if there were special conditions of an encounter that should raise or reduce the CR - at that point you are just guessing anyway.
Last edited:
David Argall
First Post
Average party level is bad standard
"I don't think it's a problem in the system so much as an excessively literal interpretation of the letter of the law, rather than the spirit."
It's an extreme, but completely correct, example to point out a 10th level would get less experience than the same 10th who had a 1st to assist him. The system say "average level of the party", period. It does not say "average, not counting..." or any other sort of judgement. Just flat average. The system is simply wrong. When you have a party that is not too far from the base 4 PC, it works with minor clink's. When you have a large or small party, the system becomes nonsense.
In my own case, I was one of a large batch of wimps attached to 4 of about 10th level, who took on a stud of about 13. We wimps pulled party average down to about 4 even tho we really did little but stand there as the studs beat him bown quickly. But going by the charts, we all gained a level or 2. Going by the total levels attacking, we should have gained a few hundred XP each, which would have been a proper award for the danger we faced and contribution we actually made.
Measuring by total party level is a much better system.
To use a more reasonable example, we have a party of 3 6th levels, an average party level of 6 of course. so they
"I don't think it's a problem in the system so much as an excessively literal interpretation of the letter of the law, rather than the spirit."
It's an extreme, but completely correct, example to point out a 10th level would get less experience than the same 10th who had a 1st to assist him. The system say "average level of the party", period. It does not say "average, not counting..." or any other sort of judgement. Just flat average. The system is simply wrong. When you have a party that is not too far from the base 4 PC, it works with minor clink's. When you have a large or small party, the system becomes nonsense.
In my own case, I was one of a large batch of wimps attached to 4 of about 10th level, who took on a stud of about 13. We wimps pulled party average down to about 4 even tho we really did little but stand there as the studs beat him bown quickly. But going by the charts, we all gained a level or 2. Going by the total levels attacking, we should have gained a few hundred XP each, which would have been a proper award for the danger we faced and contribution we actually made.
Measuring by total party level is a much better system.
To use a more reasonable example, we have a party of 3 6th levels, an average party level of 6 of course. so they
Every 10th level fighter who has been "assisted" by a 1st level fighter against a CR 10 threat, raise your hand.
I actually think that there is an interesting logic to this. If I wanted to make the combat more of a challenge for a 10th level fighter, I would introduce a low-level character that is in great peril from the monster (NPC whatever). Now the fighter has to both defeat the monster and protect the stupid 1st level fighter who did not run and hide.
The system is far from perfect, admittedly. I just thought this particular imperfection brings up an interesting idea.
I actually think that there is an interesting logic to this. If I wanted to make the combat more of a challenge for a 10th level fighter, I would introduce a low-level character that is in great peril from the monster (NPC whatever). Now the fighter has to both defeat the monster and protect the stupid 1st level fighter who did not run and hide.
The system is far from perfect, admittedly. I just thought this particular imperfection brings up an interesting idea.
Zappo
Explorer
I said this and I'll repeat it. People who diss the CR system based on unusual examples should take a reality check.
I hope none of you seriously thinks that WotC should invent a simple method that gives a decent estimate of any given D&D party's chance of winning any given encounter and expected resources expended (and therefore the reward they should get).
I don't know about the guys at WotC, but if I was able to do that, I would instead make a model that accurately predicts the share market and get filthy rich, or devise a method to unerringly predict weather conditions and get a Nobel prize. Both things look fairly easier.
I hope none of you seriously thinks that WotC should invent a simple method that gives a decent estimate of any given D&D party's chance of winning any given encounter and expected resources expended (and therefore the reward they should get).
I don't know about the guys at WotC, but if I was able to do that, I would instead make a model that accurately predicts the share market and get filthy rich, or devise a method to unerringly predict weather conditions and get a Nobel prize. Both things look fairly easier.
Trainz said:
Hey, I do this in Neverwinter Nights. I summon a dire wolf and buff it so it can survive high level encounters and then I get twice the XPs.
I wouldn't try pulling this in a PnP game, though.
Besides, it's the designers' fault for counting summoned monsters in XP calculations.
Similar Threads
