Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Reynard" data-source="post: 5145279" data-attributes="member: 467">I was reading through the Dragon Age GM's guide, in which it explicitly suggests awarding XP based on the difficulty of an encounter -- which is assessed *after* the encounter occurs. This got me to thinking about D&D and XP and various philosophies about XP rewards.Some people (like me!) prefer to establish an XP reward for the encounter during its design -- or, more often than not, let the game determine for me what the XP value of the encounter is. Four orcs? That's 100 XP! (or some variation thereof). If the PCs are unlucky, perform poorly as a team or otherwise end up having a serious problem with those four orcs, thems, as they say, is the breaks. Other people, when presented with that encounter gone awry, choose to reward XP as if it weren't, for example, four orcs, but four ogres. They gave the party trouble as if they were ogres, and ogres would certainly be worth more than orcs, so it follows that those orcs should be treated, XP wise, as ogres.And, of course, there are many people who fall somewhere between these extremes, being all snow-flakey and special.Which one is "right" or preferable leads inevitibly to questions of what XP is, and who is it for. Is it a player reward mechanism? Does it represent some metaphysical force or quality? Is it a simulation of learning? Different answers to these questions will inform how one awards XP, or expects it to be awarded.In addition, how do other rewards such as treasure fit in? If one is willing to consider an encounter more difficult than it should be for the XP awarded, should the treasure from the encounter not also be increased?</blockquote>

Verification