Xp question for WotC folks

[DandD]

Bonus points for roleplaying? A stupid thing that should have been buried in the past. It's not the Gamemaster who should decide if you're playing your character correclty, personality-wise. Of course, I also don't like giving out XP after every battle, as that's simply a chore, so I simply let the player characters level up after a good chapter-ish end.

 

[marune]

Bonus points for roleplaying? A stupid thing that should have been buried in the past. It's not the Gamemaster who should decide if you're playing your character correclty, personality-wise. Of course, I also don't like giving out XP after every battle, as that's simply a chore, so I simply let the player characters level up after a good chapter-ish end.

XP for "acting in character" has no place in D&D, I agree on that.

However, arbitrary leveling is IMHO a bad idea because XP is first and foremost a reward for sucess against challenges.

 

[marune]

How does this address his question?

My examples are not perfect, because the player with the lower level character is penalized vs his teammates more than vs the opponent.

It would be more like giving poor equipement to a player in a team-based sport or hurting him before a game.

 

[Tortoise]

Not to derail, but it seems to me that there can be better ways of encouraging players to show up than extra XP for attendance, or that if one's players ask for extra XP just for showing up, they're kind of missing the point.

I don't give extra for showing up. I give half if they don't show up, but their character info is available and the character is at risk, and no xp if they miss completely. Mix that with giving rewards for other things and you get some interesting (to me at least) variance.

My current groups have still managed to stay close. One group has managed to all make 7th level even though at one time they had a variance, another is all 4th level, and they had a variance at one time, and the other group is now all 6th though they at one point were mixed levels.

I have yet to see the method cause a problem and with the current situation for one group it seems to be helping. (I'm running a mixed Night of Dissolution/Banewarrens adventure in Ptolus and the mix of the two adventures could result in the group being far more powerful than the challenges due to too much xp. They're already 2 characters above standard group size which gives them a noticeable power advantage as it stands.)

 

[DandD]

XP for "acting in character" has no place in D&D, I agree on that.

However, arbitrary leveling is IMHO a bad idea because XP is first and foremost a reward for sucess against challenges.

And you want to accumulate XP to get a level up. So if they get to the Chapter End, they overcame the challenge anyway, and get to level up. Nothing arbitrarly at that. It even cuts away the nonsensical question why and how the characters suddenly get stronger during the adventure course, or worse, when they level up their characters inmidst the game. Talk about a downer.

 

[Tortoise]

Bonus points for roleplaying? A stupid thing that should have been buried in the past. It's not the Gamemaster who should decide if you're playing your character correclty, personality-wise. Of course, I also don't like giving out XP after every battle, as that's simply a chore, so I simply let the player characters level up after a good chapter-ish end.

Just to be clear, I don't worry about the concept of "correct" or "alignment", the rewards are for "involved and interesting". I haven't worried about "correct" for decades, if I ever really did.

 

[malraux]

IMix that with giving rewards for other things and you get some interesting (to me at least) variance.

But do your players like it?

 

[Kzach]

I have been playing D&D's various editions since 1980. In the earlier incarnations of the game the characters leveled at different rates frequently causing the situation.

Which was an attempt at balance (a very bad one, but one nevertheless).

So translating that to 3.x or 4e is just silly. Both balance things within the levels themselves, there is no need for one class to move faster or slower than another.

 

[DandD]

I don't care about alignement (as there can still be tons of differences between Lawful Good types, for example), although I still stick my character to it in D&D 3rd Edition. Also, "involved and interesting" doesn't have to be the same for all. That's one GM-fiat I am glad to never ever experience about at all. But it's your gaming group, if they're ready to endure such things, kudos to them.
I know that I'd rather play a game for fun, instead of forcing myself to come so that my character doesn't get behind and hinders the other players characters, or trying to please the gamemaster individually so that I get more bonus points for the character advancements.

 

[PeterWeller]

I don't give extra for showing up. I give half if they don't show up, but their character info is available and the character is at risk, and no xp if they miss completely. Mix that with giving rewards for other things and you get some interesting (to me at least) variance.

Ahh, that makes sense. I handle player attendance a little differently; we just play something else if the whole party can't show up. That's probably why I didn't understand your initial point.

My examples are not perfect, because the player with the lower level character is penalized vs his teammates more than vs the opponent.

It would be more like giving poor equipement to a player in a team-based sport or hurting him before a game.

I get what you were saying now. It's different, though, in this case because the players are working in concert instead of in competition.



In response to the OP, I don't think you'd see a big problem with a small variance in player level.