XP for "defeated" monsters

[Trainz]

Grreeetings....

In our game tonight, we had an encounter with a green dragon. We fought, until it fled to it's lair. After a 2 hour treck, we fought it again (it had healed all it's wounds) and killed it.

I argued to the DM that we should have had XP when we drove it away the first time, AND when we killed it in it's lair, he said that he should only award XP for it once.

I think I recalled in the DMG 3.0 that my interpretation is correct, but I couldn't find info about that in the DMG 3.5, about the meaning of "Defeat a monster". The DM has yet to give us XP for the fight(s).

Your thoughts ?

 

[CalrinAlshaw]

Your DM was correct, if the second encounter however didn't happen until say, a month later, sure, I would give half XP for the first, and full for the second encounter. But since a quick escape to it's lair followed by healing itself and waiting in ambush, I would consider it a single "encounter" with that creature, it's lair just happens to be 2 hours away is all.

Calrin Alshaw

 

[Maliki]

I'm not sure what either DMG says but I would agree with your DM, I would have only given XP once for the dragon.

 

[NPC]

2 times the XP, IMO

Since the dragon fled for its life, you defeated it, IMO. Award XP.

I assume after it retreated, you you dropped out of initiative, right? Then when you fought it the second time, you went back into initiative, right? IMO, then it's two separate encounters. Award XP twice.

You expended resources to fight the dragon twice. You "defeated" him twice.

At least, that's how I run it when I DM.

 

[heimdall]

I'd award only once. The dragon's treasure and its intelligent use thereof is something I consider part and parcel with the CR.

 

[maddman75]

The CR and ECL mechanics are at best creative fictions with no basis in reality. Personally I chucked the whole thing and give XP for progressing the story and playing. Getting XP for monsters can lead to some silly behaviour - such as ignoring a safe route to finish the important quest because you might miss some monsters and thus some XP. Better to give the XP for the quest, regardless of whether the monsters get fought or not.

 

[heimdall]

The CR and ECL mechanics are at best creative fictions with no basis in reality. Personally I chucked the whole thing and give XP for progressing the story and playing. Getting XP for monsters can lead to some silly behaviour - such as ignoring a safe route to finish the important quest because you might miss some monsters and thus some XP. Better to give the XP for the quest, regardless of whether the monsters get fought or not.

The CR works rather well with my group, but I do think about what their strengths and weaknesses are because they aren't completely a "standard party." I award XP for fighting, even some in defeat, because it does represent experience in my book. Then again, I do have alternate awards for role-playing around unnecessary encounters. For instance, in a recent game the cleric of Paladine realized the behavior of 3 guardians (Elan psychic warrior and 2 soulknives) didn't fit with an evil group, especially after they withdrew when a truce was agreed upon (thus letting the party tend to him, for he was down and dying). They received more for the diplomatic approach then they would have gotten for slaying the 3 Elan.

 

[Greylock]

I argued to the DM that we should have had XP when we drove it away the first time, AND when we killed it in it's lair, he said that he should only award XP for it once.

Your thoughts ?

My simplistic take on the matter? Don't argue with your DM. Wrong, wrong , wrong...

 

[Dogbrain]

Under the current theory, one no longer gets experience for "monsters". One gets experience for overcoming challenges or for "encounters". Thus, an ongoing villain could be defeated many times, and the PCs could get experience for each defeat. The old "you must destroy the monster to get the XP" model made it hard on ongoing villains. The players knew that they could only get the payoff by killing the guy.

 

[heimdall]

Under the current theory, one no longer gets experience for "monsters". One gets experience for overcoming challenges or for "encounters". Thus, an ongoing villain could be defeated many times, and the PCs could get experience for each defeat. The old "you must destroy the monster to get the XP" model made it hard on ongoing villains. The players knew that they could only get the payoff by killing the guy.

True, but that was easily solved by awarding XP for accomplishing an adventure objective. In the end the party would end up with more experience for a bad guy who got away but reappeared several more times before finally being done away with than one who went done easily before their blades the first time.