D&D 5E XP for Absent Players

[jasper]

With 5E a spread of 4 levels is not much power difference most of the time. But I am no longer in favor of punishing people who can not show because real life comes first. Or to be nicer, D&D as my primary hobby is not in the top 5 things to do. So if I were to homebrew, I would just give out free levels. The regular players will be rewarded with plot about the pcs, cool flavor add on to magic items or trinkets etc.
Pink bubble never heard of that style being called that. Nice. I would only allow a spouse to play someone else pc. If the party needed a +1 I would throw them an NPC to run.

 

[Retreater]

XP has been a major stress for me as a DM. I would have to run extra, meaningless encounters to get the party to be "the right level" for adventure paths. I would have characters fall behind their party mates due to real world issues - and then those characters could not fulfill their roles ("you're a few XP too short to be 7th level, so no access to raise dead.")
After getting over myself and learning how to use milestone - when I DM I will not use XP again for any level-based system. Under any circumstance. I can control the pace of my games. I can create challenges that are appropriate instead of having to grind "XP level-up encounters."
I won't be surprised if XP doesn't make it into 6E. It's as out of place in modern game design as THAC0.

 

[iserith]

XP has been a major stress for me as a DM. I would have to run extra, meaningless encounters to get the party to be "the right level" for adventure paths. I would have characters fall behind their party mates due to real world issues - and then those characters could not fulfill their roles ("you're a few XP too short to be 7th level, so no access to raise dead.")
After getting over myself and learning how to use milestone - when I DM I will not use XP again for any level-based system. Under any circumstance. I can control the pace of my games. I can create challenges that are appropriate instead of having to grind "XP level-up encounters."
I won't be surprised if XP doesn't make it into 6E. It's as out of place in modern game design as THAC0.

If you're not running "adventure paths" though, standard XP works just fine if not phenomenally well. For example, in a sandbox game, the players control where they go and what they do, based in part on what will get them XP and treasure which are the incentives driving them toward particular content.

Story-based advancement (which is what many people call "milestone," even though that's not technically correct at least in a D&D 5e context) is better for adventure paths since it ties completion of story goals to leveling with no XP at all. The incentive therefore is to complete the story goals which keeps the players and their characters on the path. There is no incentive to go off the path where there is no content prepared.

It's not that standard XP is bad per se or antiquated; it's just it's not the right tool for every campaign or adventure structure.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I won't be surprised if XP doesn't make it into 6E. It's as out of place in modern game design as THAC0.

I've played in groups with milestone leveling and there's nothing wrong with it. I even proposed it to my group at one point - and was vehemently shot down.

A lot of players enjoy getting XP. It's fun to see your character incrementally advancing towards the next level. Additionally, I'd argue that XP is better suited to certain styles of campaign, such as sandboxes.

I'd be very surprised if D&D ever got rid of XP.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

In our 5e Curse of Strahd campaign, I awarded XP and kept everyone the same level. One of the players (of 4) had to miss quite a few sessions because of a variable works schedule that took him out of town. His character would either tag along as an NPC that the other players could run in combat or disappear for a solo quest of hunting wolves. Worked out just fine.

For other 5e campaigns, I've awarded XP for the characters who participated in the session. Other characters simply fade into the background for whatever reason. We don't think about it too hard. All the players are on board with that and they don't consider it a punishment to miss out on XP. It's seen as a reward to the character for participating in the adventure that session. In one of my current campaigns, the gap has been a large as 4 levels. As the levels get higher and it takes more XP to advance, the gap has been shrinking. They are now all between 11th and 13th. Everyone has missed a game now and then, some more than others, but the party marches on. Has been working out just fine.

There hasn't been a problem with power disparity in our 5e games due to characters being different levels - I frankly think that this may be some holdover thinking from prior editions where the level discrepency was more pronounced. Not every group of monsters is the same exact level (e.g. hobgoblin captain, 2 hobgoblins, and 3 wolves), so I don't see the necessity of the PCs being the same level either. Sometimes they have a low level NPC along for the ride fighting with them or that they need to protect. Again, not really an issue as long as everyone can contribute to the game session in a meaningful way - something I make sure of as a DM by spreading the spotlight around. I don't try too hard to balance the encounters either. I certainly want to make sure the party is sufficiently challenged most of the time, but I also throw some intentionally easy encounters at them - and excessively difficult ones - once in a while to keep them guessing. Point being, their exact PC levels don't matter too much in my encounter design. There are plenty of ways to ratchet up or down the difficulty on the fly, if I feel a particular scene warrants it.

Finally, I should mention that I award XP not just for killing monsters. Disabling/avoiding traps, solving puzzles, making allies, talking themselves out of trouble, discovering plot points, completing mini-quests, etc etc are all rewarded with XP to some extent. I hand out the XP after each session to the PCs who participated and the players track it. Simple. They all get excited when they are within reach of leveling up - and some happily announce it at the start of a session. Seems to work well for our group.

 

[iserith]

A lot of players enjoy getting XP. It's fun to see your character incrementally advancing towards the next level.

When we're sitting down to play my games, one of the topics of pre-game discussions among the group is "Who's close to leveling?" Those who are close are super excited and it drives enthusiasm for Getting Sh..tuff Done. I judge the success of a session, in part, on how much content we cover in 4 hours, so that incentive is working.

And then I award XP after each challenge. In most of my campaigns, if that puts you over what you need, you level up on the spot. That is always a cause for celebration among the players. It's a ton of fun because now a member of the team (or several members of the team) are even more powerful and we get even more stuff done...

 

[Lanefan]

Looking at all the posts here from DMs who either don't use xp at all or who always even it out so everyone gets the same, I have to ask what it is you're trying to reward or incentivize.

Simple player attendance? If someone shows up and plays on his phone all night, or does nothing except gabble about hockey instead of focusing on the game, why should that player get the same reward as the person who focuses on the game all night and helps drive the action? There's no incentive to drive the action - in fact there's a disincentive, as the player(s) driving the action is (are) by extension most often putting their characters at greater risk in so doing. This makes the 'optimal' path that of sitting back and riding the bus rather than helping to drive it, because you know you're going to get the same reward anyway; and how is that any good?

Simple "character attendance"? By this I mean a vague in-fiction extension of player attendance. If a character hangs in the back and does nothing of use in an encounter or even an entire adventure, why should it get the same reward as the characters who actually did what had to be done to overcome the challenge? Again, this only serves to disincentivize taking risks and getting after it, as you know you're going to get the same reward no matter what you do...which leads to the same 'optimal' path, that being to take as little risk as possible relative to the rest of the party.

Forcing everyone to be the same level? Sorry, but in a 5e (or 0e-1e-2e) environment this one holds no water at all - the system is more than flexible enough to handle some in-party level disparity, and balancing encounters to the party average is - at most - all you ever need.

So, it's individual xp all the way, and by encounter. If nobody's close to bumping I'll let 'em pile up for a few sessions before giving them out; and in any case they're only received after an overnight rest - you wake up in the morning having learned from what you did yesterday.

And a question for those who want everyone always the same level: if a PC pulls the Sun card from a Deck of Many Things and gains 50K xp on the spot, does that PC then have to retire until everyone else can catch up?

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[The Crimson Binome]

I won't be surprised if XP doesn't make it into 6E. It's as out of place in modern game design as THAC0.

I've played in games that use milestone levelling, and it was hot garbage. There's already zero consequences for combat in 5E, since it's nearly-impossible to die and everyone regenerates overnight. If you couldn't get XP for combat, then there would be no reason for combat to exist. It would just be a time sink that everyone tries to avoid.

That's not what I want from a D&D-like experience, considering that combat is the one pillar where every player can participate on equal footing. It should be something to look forward to.

 

[Campbell]

When I use group experience what I am trying to incentivize is teamwork and players caring for the individual concerns of each others characters.

I do not alter prepared material to account for a player's absence. Being down a character means the group may be missing valuable skills. This means there can be a certain amount of self policing, but it not generally a big deal. Generally just some good natured ribbing about how they really could of used the rogue or cleric. That's about the extent of social pressure I want.