PDA

View Full Version : Distributing XP with noncombatant PC's



WarKitty
2010-11-03, 05:22 PM
How do you handle awarding XP when a character is not involved in the fight? How would you award XP in the following scenarios (full, partial or none)?

1. The characters get into an ambush. One character is a significant distance from the others and would take several rounds to reach the fight. The terrain is such that ranged attacks are not possible. The character decides to continue with whatever he was doing, since he cannot reach the party before the fight ends.

2. The characters get into an ambush. One character is a significant distance from the others and would take several rounds to reach the fight. The terrain is such that ranged attacks are not possible. The character begins heading towards the party but is still en route when the fight ends.

3. The characters get into a fight. Due to the presence of a wind wall or somesuch, ranged attacks are not possible. One character, a low-level caster, decides she is almost out of spells and the rest of the party can handle the fight just fine. She avoids combat.

4. The characters get into a fight. One of the characters decides that the fight was unnecessary and goes against her morals. She avoids combat.

Tyndmyr
2010-11-03, 05:25 PM
If a character does not get involved in a fight in any way, they gain no xp.

If they do, and their side wins, they get full xp.

That's all the differentiation I make. Tactical retreats do not penalize you, nor does contributing less than optimally for whatever reason. Now, the latter problem may cause some degree of conflict with your teammates, as is reasonable, but you were there, you fought, you learned from it.

Therefore, examples 1 and 2 gain no xp, 3 and 4 do.

WarKitty
2010-11-03, 05:31 PM
If a character does not get involved in a fight in any way, they gain no xp.

If they do, and their side wins, they get full xp.

That's all the differentiation I make. Tactical retreats do not penalize you, nor does contributing less than optimally for whatever reason. Now, the latter problem may cause some degree of conflict with your teammates, as is reasonable, but you were there, you fought, you learned from it.

Therefore, examples 1 and 2 gain no xp, 3 and 4 do.

But 2 was at least trying to get involved in the fight, whereas 3 and 4 were intentionally not involved at all?

The Big Dice
2010-11-03, 05:33 PM
I tend not to hand out XP for fights. It turns the game from a rolelpaying game into a tactical combat game with overly complicated units.

So I'd have given people XP for acting in keeping with how their character should act in the situation they found themselves in.

It's a different approach from the one in the DMG, but it works well for my group.

Coidzor
2010-11-03, 05:42 PM
But 2 was at least trying to get involved in the fight, whereas 3 and 4 were intentionally not involved at all?

3 and 4 are on the tactical map and have to take steps to defend themselves even if they're not going to go looking to go on the offensive. 3 is theoretically still looking out for his or her allies and as such would be on the lookout for additional threats and ready to counter them if it became necessary.

Whereas apparently 2 is in no danger whatsoever, nor can she contribute in any way.

If there is no way for 3 and 4 to be threatened and they leave the area... Then, yeah, they'd get nothing.

Tyndmyr
2010-11-03, 05:42 PM
But 2 was at least trying to get involved in the fight, whereas 3 and 4 were intentionally not involved at all?

3 appears to have been there, and been a legitimate target for the bad guy, and presumably identified the wind wall, either by attempting to attack, or by using spellcraft or some such. It depends on the specifics, but so long as they make at least some attempt to contribute in some way, I consider them involved.

4 depends on the details of how combat was avoided. Note that I give xp for overcoming challenges without using combat. Talking or stealthing your way around something is equally good. You are still involved.

If 3 and 4 are instead someone who opts not to involves themselves at all, but say, gives up before engaging or attempting to circumvent the obstacle and goes home, well, yeah...no xp. D&D's an adventuring game. Ya gotta do stuffs to get the sweet xp.


In pure sandbox games, where players get to frequently pick their encounters and challenges, I use the additional criteria that a challenge must have some measure of risk in order to get xp.

ericgrau
2010-11-03, 05:50 PM
Having PCs at different levels is usually a bad idea. Being as little as 2 levels behind can make a big difference in how much someone can participate in the game. That's why lower level characters are supposed to get more xp.

Generally I'd recommend giving everyone full xp unless they did nothing at all in a fight. It's simply not as fun otherwise. Players should only be behind when a serious penalty is necessary, like death, and then only temporarily (solved by extra xp for lower level PCs). That way you don't trivialize important things like death and never doing anything at all. But differences in xp should never exist in typical fights. It's tolerable at best and annoying to play with at worst.

I'd give xp for 3 and 4. Even giving xp for 1 and 2 wouldn't hurt the game, but it's a bit hard to believe.

WarKitty
2010-11-03, 05:57 PM
In case you're wondering, 1, 3, and 4 have all happened to my character. In the first I had been dealing with a guard animal (via handle animal) when I heard the combat. I had a speed of 10 feet with a 200ft distance to cross to the corner where I could obtain LoS. In 3 we were fighting some sort of monster. I was almost out of spells and we clearly weren't done for the day. I forget why I wasn't using my sling, I think it was DR/piercing or something. I ran so I didn't get KO'd again. For the fourth, we found a clutch of shocker lizards on top of a suit of armor, which I identified as magic. While I was discussing nonlethal ways to get the armor one of the PC's charged and attacked the lizards. My character protested as the battle was completely unnecessary and withdrew (although kept an eye out for anyone who fell unconscious to heal them).

Coidzor
2010-11-03, 06:09 PM
10' move speed? :smalleek: Why?

And why on earth would they leave your character behind? :smallconfused:

dsmiles
2010-11-03, 06:30 PM
1. The characters get into an ambush. One character is a significant distance from the others and would take several rounds to reach the fight. The terrain is such that ranged attacks are not possible. The character decides to continue with whatever he was doing, since he cannot reach the party before the fight ends.
Partial or none, depending on what he/she was actually doing.

2. The characters get into an ambush. One character is a significant distance from the others and would take several rounds to reach the fight. The terrain is such that ranged attacks are not possible. The character begins heading towards the party but is still en route when the fight ends.
Full, they tried their best to get there in time, but were just too slow.

3. The characters get into a fight. Due to the presence of a wind wall or somesuch, ranged attacks are not possible. One character, a low-level caster, decides she is almost out of spells and the rest of the party can handle the fight just fine. She avoids combat.
None.

4. The characters get into a fight. One of the characters decides that the fight was unnecessary and goes against her morals. She avoids combat.
Full, good RP, there.

Kylarra
2010-11-03, 07:04 PM
I tend to avoid individual XP totals personally, but if I were...


1) Probably none and then individual exp for whatever they were doing, assuming it was of actual importance and not messing around in the woods or something.

2-4 probably grant experience.

Callista
2010-11-03, 07:09 PM
XP for fights... ehh. Not my thing. I don't like all the fiddly calculation for no good reason when I could just be giving them XP for completing quests.

Starbuck_II
2010-11-03, 07:09 PM
4. The characters get into a fight. One of the characters decides that the fight was unnecessary and goes against her morals. She avoids combat.

Did 4 try to Aid Another to protect the allies? +2 AC for making a roll of 10. That why she isn't attacking just defending an ally.

WarKitty
2010-11-03, 07:34 PM
10' move speed? :smalleek: Why?

And why on earth would they leave your character behind? :smallconfused:

Anthrobat the level before I got wild shape. And I'm not entirely sure but I remember it not being my idea.


Did 4 try to Aid Another to protect the allies? +2 AC for making a roll of 10. That why she isn't attacking just defending an ally.

In that particular situation, bad idea due to AoE attacks and low HP. Plus as far as I/my character am concerned, that's the same thing morally as attacking.

Galsiah
2010-11-03, 07:42 PM
I give everyone full exp, because they were all part of an encounter, and whether or not they actually contributed to the encounter they were still part of it, and thus get exp for it. By virtue of not dying they still did something. Otherwise you wouldn't be able to give players exp for running away from the encounter, which still should grant them exp because they made it through the encounter.

Loren
2010-11-03, 08:36 PM
If they "threw or took a hit" they get the xp, mostly because I wouldn't want to be bothered with figuring out individual xp.

However, I prefer a narrative style, so I like to hand out level ups when it fits the story. Usually I'd give a level up when the characters have a chance to rest, train, and/or study. That way they can aquire new abilities "off screen" so that it takes less effort to justify how they can now do things they couldn't before.

Aasimar
2010-11-03, 09:03 PM
Everybody who turned up for the session gets the same amount of XP. You don't want to penalize people for having a non-combat build, you don't want to penalize them for wanting to participate but being unable to because of logistics.

In the end, the game is supposed to be fun, and it's more fun when the players feel like they're equals.

You don't want to reward just the killing, and if you start introducing out of combat XP only for people contributing out of combat, you end up with a system that's needlessly complicated.

Just hand-wave it, seriously.

LordBlades
2010-11-04, 06:09 AM
1. Depending what he is doing. In our groups we usually handle situations like this by not awarding the char XP fior the combat, but awarding some sort of bonus XP based on what he was doing (sometimes it's more than he XP for the encounter :smallsmile:).

2. Full XP. The char did his best to contribute.

3. Full XP again. Sound tactical choices shouldn't be penalized. If the battle is truly winnable without the wizard expendig any spells I see no reason to punish him for doing the smart thing.


4. See 1. In my group we don't usually award combat XP for situations like this, but we do grant some pretty hefty RP bonuses.

awa
2010-11-04, 11:23 AM
personally i typically give every one the same amount of xp.
otherwise you a party of different levels which i dislike. last take a look at this dilemma from another perspective who gets exp when a rogue overcomes a trap? the whole party or just the rogue?

Severus
2010-11-04, 12:50 PM
I agree with those who suggest that doing XP at this level of detail is counter-productive. You want your players to act normally. You don't want them to modify their behavior because one thing gets them XP and one thing doesn't.

Examples include awarding half xp for defeating but not killing an opponent. Players then just say "aw, screw it, kill everything." Here, if what the player was doing was useful, then you're telling him to stop doing what he would do to rush back to the fight so he doesn't lose xp.

As we've gotten older, we've found that the best thing to do is for the GM to handle the XP behind the scene and tell us when we level. As players then, all we focus on is the adventure and how to achieve our objective. I think it leads to much better and more rational roleplaying.