gfishfunk
2016-01-27, 10:21 AM
Another thread got me thinking about something I have done in the past, and that I plan on doing again in the near, near future. In about 1 month, I am going to start GMing a 5e game again (its been about a year, a year and a half).
I generally do not award experience based on the monster manual, but instead award experience off of a scoresheet that I create when planning an adventure or phase (several encounters that are related by vicinity or continuity).
I will typically construct somewhere between 75 and 125 points, and score out of 100. Also, I will award the entire total of 100 points for things that players do outside of my pre-conceived ideas. They did something I did not expect, and it was great. Tons of points. I try to keep it away from 'guess what I am thinking' and provide a more stream-lined adventuring hooks created out of the player's backstories, intermixed with plot and story type of things that I wanted to do as well.
Why do I do this? In short, it helps people who either do not really know how to do anything but hack and slash games figure out the social / exploration aspects of the game. Also, newer players tend to think that is exactly what D&D is: you kill things, take their stuff, and kill more things.
The big thing is managing expectations: I'm letting the players know they don't have to kill everything. In fact, there are things out there that are stronger than they are. Hack and slash players do not really want to just kill things - they want to win. (Or so I believe.) Winning is clearly defined by killing. I instead let them know that I have a score sheet, and that there is a plot that they may (but do not have to) follow. In specific encounters, I provide a queue at the beginning, possibly even stating straight up 'you need three successes, but three failures will end the encounter.' This lets folks know that this encounter will not be oriented around combat (though they can pursue it that way if they wish), but there is a defined means of success.
Here is a typical score card (simplified slightly) for a short module with a group of merchants stranded by the side of the road when the adventurers come across them, about to camp for the night. One of their members states that he wandered away and saw some crumbled ruins from a hilltop.
5 points: assist the merchants in repairing their wagons
10 points: Figuring out that the merchants are smugglers, trying to avoid taxes on legitimate goods
10 points: find information from the merchants relevant to one of the PC's backstory
10 points: discovering tracks left around the camp from orcs, and identifying that it was likely a scout
25 points: Fully explore the ruins (5 'rooms', 5 xp each, 2 of the rooms are hidden)
15 points: defeat three combat encounters, each a group of orcs at the ruins
10 points: defeat the leader of the orcs
15 points: identify the ruins, who made them, and what happened to make the former city 'ruins'
I generally do not award experience based on the monster manual, but instead award experience off of a scoresheet that I create when planning an adventure or phase (several encounters that are related by vicinity or continuity).
I will typically construct somewhere between 75 and 125 points, and score out of 100. Also, I will award the entire total of 100 points for things that players do outside of my pre-conceived ideas. They did something I did not expect, and it was great. Tons of points. I try to keep it away from 'guess what I am thinking' and provide a more stream-lined adventuring hooks created out of the player's backstories, intermixed with plot and story type of things that I wanted to do as well.
Why do I do this? In short, it helps people who either do not really know how to do anything but hack and slash games figure out the social / exploration aspects of the game. Also, newer players tend to think that is exactly what D&D is: you kill things, take their stuff, and kill more things.
The big thing is managing expectations: I'm letting the players know they don't have to kill everything. In fact, there are things out there that are stronger than they are. Hack and slash players do not really want to just kill things - they want to win. (Or so I believe.) Winning is clearly defined by killing. I instead let them know that I have a score sheet, and that there is a plot that they may (but do not have to) follow. In specific encounters, I provide a queue at the beginning, possibly even stating straight up 'you need three successes, but three failures will end the encounter.' This lets folks know that this encounter will not be oriented around combat (though they can pursue it that way if they wish), but there is a defined means of success.
Here is a typical score card (simplified slightly) for a short module with a group of merchants stranded by the side of the road when the adventurers come across them, about to camp for the night. One of their members states that he wandered away and saw some crumbled ruins from a hilltop.
5 points: assist the merchants in repairing their wagons
10 points: Figuring out that the merchants are smugglers, trying to avoid taxes on legitimate goods
10 points: find information from the merchants relevant to one of the PC's backstory
10 points: discovering tracks left around the camp from orcs, and identifying that it was likely a scout
25 points: Fully explore the ruins (5 'rooms', 5 xp each, 2 of the rooms are hidden)
15 points: defeat three combat encounters, each a group of orcs at the ruins
10 points: defeat the leader of the orcs
15 points: identify the ruins, who made them, and what happened to make the former city 'ruins'