XP Idea

[ChampionoftheTriad]

Uh...yeah...sorry for all the posts, but I just realized...its simple...it would be 20 encounters per level...

....that's a good start on slowing down advancement without peaving the players....

...but maybe 150 multiplier would fit the bill, eh?

 

[Jack Simth]

Uh...yeah...sorry for all the posts, but I just realized...its simple...it would be 20 encounters per level...

....that's a good start on slowing down advancement without peaving the players....

...but maybe 150 multiplier would fit the bill, eh?

Well, you can choose how many equal CR encounters it takes to level up simply by controling that base multiplier (100 xp in your original 40 encounters/level, 300 xp to approximate the base progression at 13.33333333... encounters/level, 1000 xp for a quick 4 encounters/level game). Likewise, it lets you note that if at level 1 your group of four best something that's CR 20, you get..... (base*20*20/4)/1 = base*100 xp. Or, if at level 20, you best something that's CR 1, you get..... (base*1*1/4)/20 = base/80 xp.

 

[Lorehead]

What are you trying to accomplish? At the least, you probably want XP awards to be proportionate to the difference between CR and level, not to the ratio between them. Otherwise, low-level characters are much better off fighting monsters a few CRs higher than them, while high-level characters are much better off fighting monsters with a lower CR. A CR 1/2 monster is not the same challenge to a 1st-level party that a CR 10 monster is to a 20th-level party, nor is a CR 3 monster the same challenge to a 1st-level party that a CR 60 monster is to a 20th-level party.

By the way, here's my take on this from before the crash.

 

[airwalkrr]

The flat XP system is fine, especially if you don't like having to consult a chart every time you award experience points. If you go with this system, however, be prepared for your PCs to level up a LOT slower. A level 20 character in a four person party fighting a CR 20 monster under your system gets a paltry 500 XP (compared to the 1,500 he'd get if you were using RAW). That is 1/3 the advancement rate. Make sure you parcel up treasure awards similarly to keep PCs on the curve.

My personal recommendation is against it. PCs tend to frown on reduced awards, which is essentially what this is. Plus, it will keep your characters mired at the same level for longer; leveling up fairly regularly is one of the most fun parts of the game.

 

[Raven Crowking]

What am I trying to accomplish?

(1) No more having to worry about APL when calculating XP. If you don't keep your PCs all around the same level, this is a big pain in the current system.

(2) Slower rate of advancement, particularly at higher levels. Under a flat XP system, higher level characters still gain something for fighting weaker opponents, so the world doesn't have to suddenly become filled with Epic monsters just because the PCs level up.

(3) Once a basic XP for CR table is established, I can list XP in my stat blocks, making calculations quicker. (I used to do this for all previous versions of the game; XP division has vastly slowed down due to APL/looking up values.)

I think that the idea of flat XP calculation handles (1) and (3) pretty well, but I am not there yet with (2). I, too, don't care for the idea of characters reaching 20th level by their 20th birthday. Let's see then:

What if I use a variable for the multiplier? Let's say that I start with a multiplier of 300 up to CR 3, then reduce the multiplier by 50 for every 3 steps in CR to a minimum of 100. I.e., up to CR 3 is 300, CR 4-6 is 250, CR 7-9 is 200, CR 10-12 is 150, and CR 13+ is 100. How does that look?

 

[Hairfoot]

My maths is terrible, and calculating XP is torturous for me. If the consensus is that this system works, I'll use it.

I like slower levelling. I've been thinking for a while about introducing proportional levelling: XP threshholds are doubled, but some class features update at the PHB intervals. Sort of like half-levelling.

 

[airwalkrr]

What am I trying to accomplish?

(1) No more having to worry about APL when calculating XP. If you don't keep your PCs all around the same level, this is a big pain in the current system.

APL is an acronym most commonly used by Living Greyhawk and really doesn't apply here. When determining XP using the RAW, you award XP to each PC individually, not based on the party's average level. You start by finding the PC's level, matching it to the monster's CR, then dividing the result by the number of PCs in the party. It's actually a very good system and easy to understand, albiet sometimes a bit lengthy to adjudicate. However, I've found that if I calculate XP while the PCs are doling out loot or trying to discuss their options as a party, it takes no time away from the game. DMs should use the time PCs give them to work on the adventure. If this time is used wisely, you never appear unprepared and your game will begin to run more smoothly.

 

[Raven Crowking]

It's actually a very good system and easy to understand, albiet sometimes a bit lengthy to adjudicate.

I usually use the time at the very end of the session, or withhold XP calculations to give out at the begining of the next game. As you have noted (and alluded to earlier), I already deviate from the RAW in terms of giving out 1/2 XP, but I am using 3.0, and unless I misunderstood it (which is, obviously, possible) I believe that table uses average character level in the party, which is what I understand APL to mean.

If I am mistaken, then that sounds like a good thing. I mean, what you describe sounds even more tortuous.

In any event, the RAW XP rules don't help me with these goals:

(2) Slower rate of advancement, particularly at higher levels. Under a flat XP system, higher level characters still gain something for fighting weaker opponents, so the world doesn't have to suddenly become filled with Epic monsters just because the PCs level up.

(3) Once a basic XP for CR table is established, I can list XP in my stat blocks, making calculations quicker. (I used to do this for all previous versions of the game; XP division has vastly slowed down due to APL/looking up values.)

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I usually use the time at the very end of the session, or withhold XP calculations to give out at the begining of the next game. As you have noted (and alluded to earlier), I already deviate from the RAW in terms of giving out 1/2 XP, but I am using 3.0, and unless I misunderstood it (which is, obviously, possible) I believe that table uses average character level in the party, which is what I understand APL to mean.

If I am mistaken, then that sounds like a good thing. I mean, what you describe sounds even more tortuous.

In any event, the RAW XP rules don't help me with these goals:

(2) Slower rate of advancement, particularly at higher levels. Under a flat XP system, higher level characters still gain something for fighting weaker opponents, so the world doesn't have to suddenly become filled with Epic monsters just because the PCs level up.

Even with a slow advancement, low CR monsters will feel inadequate against higher level PCs. Even if it takes longer to get to a certain level, the PC still has the power of its level, and even if he still gains XP for weak monsters (which he does even in the standard system for very weak creatures), the fight usually won't be very exciting or interesting for the PCs.

(3) Once a basic XP for CR table is established, I can list XP in my stat blocks, making calculations quicker. (I used to do this for all previous versions of the game; XP division has vastly slowed down due to APL/looking up values.)

That might indeed be an advantage.

I used to precalculate the XP rewards for characters (since I knew their levels) while designing an adventure. It had the advantage of me being able to predict their next advancement and preparing the next one in advance, too. But I have given it up, since we had a considerable player number fluctuation (2 of our players are only available every other game).
All in our group have now gone to give out the CR after each encounter. One of the players takes the CRs down, and after some time (usually at some "breaks" in-game, especially when a level-up is nearby), the player calculates the XP and they are given out.

Maybe our group is unique in that we can do that, since everyone is familiar with the rules and also masters his own campaign. But for us, it works fine.

Addendum (forgot to post that):
One problem with changing the XP system alonen is the PC's treasure. They might have a lower level, but if you continue to use regular treasure ratings and NPC gear value, you wil run into the problem of the players amassing wealth. If it is difficult to shop for expensive items, you might reduce a few of the probems, but note that even a lot of cheap items can cause trouble. Since weak NPCs will not require a lot of (consumable) resources, either, this effect could increase exponential.

As a result, it might become very difficult to use CR and EL as a guideline on encounter difficulty, since the characters are probably stronger than indicated by their level. And once you have reached that point, you lost most of the advantages, and could reach the same results with using purely story award XPs.

 

[airwalkrr]

...but I am using 3.0...

Ah! That explains why you are using the average character level. The XP system changed a bit in 3.5 to what I described previously. I.e. the "self-correcting" system. And I think you should try it before you knock it. It isn't as "tortuous" as you might imagine.

In any event, the RAW XP rules don't help me with these goals:

(2) Slower rate of advancement, particularly at higher levels. Under a flat XP system, higher level characters still gain something for fighting weaker opponents, so the world doesn't have to suddenly become filled with Epic monsters just because the PCs level up.

So you want 15th level PCs to fight MM orcs? I understand your expectation that the world doesn't get tougher just because the PCs do, but this is not the way to do it. Unless your PCs are seriously underpowered, they aren't going to get a challenge that way. PCs don't want to fight weaker opponents at higher levels. They want the challenge to rise with their power. Instead of forcing the world to change, the PCs should move to another locale. Perhaps they begin adventuring in the outer planes, or maybe they leave their sleepy little kingdom for one that is being invaded by an evil lich with monstrous undead at his command. You don't have to fill your world with epic monsters just because PCs level up, just take them to a different part of the world.

(3) Once a basic XP for CR table is established, I can list XP in my stat blocks, making calculations quicker. (I used to do this for all previous versions of the game; XP division has vastly slowed down due to APL/looking up values.)

Then I suggest using the flat XP system presented in Unearthed Arcana. It is far more balanced than the method you suggest. You can divy it up however you like too, to make the system self-correcting if you like.