XP/Level gain & sandboxing

[S'mon]

I've noticed in my sandboxy Vault of Larin Karr game that over time the PCs seem to be levelling up faster and faster.

It took 5 (4-5 hour) sessions to go from level 1 to level 2. Then around levels 2-4 it took 3-4 sessions to level, with lots of bonus XP. Then around levels 4-5 it took 2-3 sessions. I stopped with the bonus XP. And recently they have been levelling pretty well every session, they are now just shy of 8th.

This seems to be a product of the sandbox environment and the XP chart. In 1e, killing 1 hd Orcs at 7th level got you negligible XP, but last session the Wizard PC killed ca 40 minion-7 Orcs with a stinking cloud, reaping 75 XP per Orc, which is a big amount even at 7th. As the PCs get higher, they seem to be more capable even vs monsters of similar level. They no longer need to run away much.

This campaign will be ending in 4 sessions & I don't much mind the rapid levelling right now, but I've started worrying about XP gain in my next campaign, also sandboxy. I'd like the PCs to level quickly to begin, then somewhat slower over time. Are there some simple ways to help do this while still sticking largely to the RAW?

 

[LostSoul]

One of my players came up with a chart that reduces/increases XP based on your level vs the opponent's level.

I'm not sure I like it though...

 

[DEFCON 1]

Don't give out XP for killing minions. Killing them becomes negligible over time and 4 of them are definitely not worth the XP of a standard monster once you're past like 3rd level.

 

[Quickleaf]

Don't give out XP for killing minions. Killing them becomes negligible over time and 4 of them are definitely not worth the XP of a standard monster once you're past like 3rd level.

If you're using waves of minions use the XP value of one wave according to RAW, and then subsequent waves no XP award for. Minions are more of a "season to taste" thing, especially when you have a wizard in your party.

More generally, when the PCs face lots of enemies 4+ levels below them, XP values become disproportionate to the threat (numbers wise they barely can hit while PCs almost always hit). I'd feel comfortable changing RAW for your sandbox style of game since it's pretty clear RAW monster XP is designed for a certain "bandwidth" of challenge.

Also there are plenty of factors which make combat challenging which don't get accounted for with XP, like enemy access to terrain powers, monsters having better position, hostile environments, situational restraints, etc.

 

[S'mon]

I guess I could give XP merely on whether an encounter was 'easy', 'average' or 'hard'? 'Average' would be the standard amount per PC (eg 200 XP at 5th), easy half that, hard double? I tend to prefer a more rigorous system though.

 

[Quickleaf]

I guess I could give XP merely on whether an encounter was 'easy', 'average' or 'hard'? 'Average' would be the standard amount per PC (eg 200 XP at 5th), easy half that, hard double? I tend to prefer a more rigorous system though.

What is making the encounters easy? It's the use of lower level foes and minions, is that right?

 

[OnlineDM]

Personally, I've long since done away with tracking XP. My characters level when it feels right (usually 2-3 sessions; leaning more toward 3 lately). If they have a super-easy time with an encounter, it's probably not worth a lot of XP (unless they were burning a lot of resources on it in order to make it easy, such as daily powers).

 

[S'mon]

What is making the encounters easy? It's the use of lower level foes and minions, is that right?

To a large extent, yes. The PCs have gone from "most things are tougher than us" to "most things are weaker than us". In 1e-2e that would have slowed down their advancement rate, but in 4e it speeds up.

I could halve XP for foes 4+ levels lower, but really they have fought very few foes more than 2 levels lower, 3 at most. I think minions are definitely an issue - very dangerous to strikers, harmless to AoE controllers. I could choose not to use minions at all in my next campaign, but that feels potentially rather baby-with-the-bathwater; I like big battles with dozens of combatants, minion rules allow that.

One big problem is auto damage from persistent zone effects, in this case from a Stinking Cloud. I've already toughened minions up with a damage threshold to bloody & kill, but the Wizard's minimum 8 damage was also the minimum to auto-kill my minions! I don't mind a 7th level Wizard killing dozens of mooks with one spell, but it doesn't seem right that it should generate nearly a level's worth of XP for the group!

So, hm, maybe the answer is just to focus on minion XP, as suggested above, and reduce it ad hoc to 1/2 or 1/3 depending on actual threat posed? Or even cap total session XP at say half the amount needed to level.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I think the fundamental issue is just that when you go FAR outside the encounter design guidelines that XP starts to get to be a poor indicator of difficulty.

This is most easily seen at low levels. I mean you can make an almost invincible 1st level encounter with a level+0 (100XP/character). Just take all minions and make them all ranged. Likewise 20 minions at-level at low paragon will probably be trivial, even if they are all ranged.

Fundamentally though I'm not sure I really understand what is happening here. It is a sandbox, so if the PCs are in an area that was designed around a 5th level difficulty and they are 8th level then of course it will be easy. The XP they get is the same either way, but presumably they will hit some harder and some easier regions over time depending on the order they visit things and what they skip.

I think if they are going to slum it ALL the time in easier areas though and that's causing an issue then simply salt your sandbox with some plot. Enemies start to work against the PCs, areas that were easy last year are not anymore. It doesn't all have to scale, but an evolving sandbox works fine, or just push the players out of the easier areas by making their long-term goals achievable only by going to the harder areas. "The King, having noted how you cleared all the undead from the old graveyard appoints you to defeat the ogre menace, he doesn't ASK." (yes, that could be a bit railroady, but the players will always be able to find another choice if they really don't want to go along, it will just lead to a similar result).

In short I would say this isn't a system fault, nor a deficiency in 4e's ability to handle a sandbox type game, but more of an issue of 4e favoring some level of momentum in story arc development.

 

[BobTheNob]

If the XP chart in the game isnt suiting your campaign, scrap it. We did a capaign from levels 1-28 over 2 1/2 years without even using XP! But that was our campaign, if you wish to use XP, just consider alternatives to the standard XP guide in the book (note : I called it "guide" rather than "rule")

I would just say stop attaching XP to klling enemies and tie it to achieveing objectives. Not only does it take away the dreaded "Lets stop the game to pick a fight" and the ever favorite "killing is our solution to everything cause we get XP for it", it also allows you to more tightly control XP allocation and link to to advancement as better suites your sandbox.