How much XP should a solo PC receive?

[gogogome]

A solo spellcaster PC strong enough to take out an encounter designed for 4 PCs is going to end up 4 levels higher than the level the encounter is intended for. This doesn't work because a spellcaster with 2 higher spell levels than what the encounter expects is going to trivialize all encounters.

On the other hand, a PC receiving only 1/4 of the XP is always going to be at a significant disadvantage since the game is 4 times harder than it should be.

So where's the sweet spot? 100% is too much, 25% is too little.

I'm going to be running Age of Worms for a solo PC who has a great deal of system mastery.

Same question about Wealth. Would 400% wealth by level at 25%xp balance each other out? 100% Wealth and 50% xp?

[Florian]

So where's the sweet spot?

That is more or less dictated by the AP itself. The encounters are based on the expectation what level the group will have at that point, not even on how many XP were doled out on the way there. Best approach is to simply forget about XP and go for milestone leveling, same as with WBL.

[Crake]

If you adjust xp, you should adjust treasure by the same amount, not the inverse. If you give 25% xp, but give 400% treasure, then the PC will actually end up with 16x the amount of treasure, because they are encountering four times as many encounters per level, and recieving four times as much treasure per encounter.

On the other hand, if you're running a solo game, I see no issue with just running CR as normal. Just remember that every CR=ECL encounter MAY be "easily" soloable, but realistically, it's also easily losable. Sure as a level 1 character you could PROBABLY solo a wolf, but the wolf could also PROBABLY solo you. As a level 3 character, you could PROBABLY solo an ogre, but the ogre could also PROBABLY solo you, etc etc. Playing solo just comes with very swingy gameplay, and any kind of save or lose effect on the player means an instant loss, since they have no party members to back them up. Anything with paralysis, significant ability damage, dominate etc becomes a "roll the dice to see if the game is over right now" encounter.

[gogogome]

If you adjust xp, you should adjust treasure by the same amount, not the inverse. If you give 25% xp, but give 400% treasure, then the PC will actually end up with 16x the amount of treasure, because they are encountering four times as many encounters per level, and recieving four times as much treasure per encounter.

On the other hand, if you're running a solo game, I see no issue with just running CR as normal. Just remember that every CR=ECL encounter MAY be "easily" soloable, but realistically, it's also easily losable. Sure as a level 1 character you could PROBABLY solo a wolf, but the wolf could also PROBABLY solo you. As a level 3 character, you could PROBABLY solo an ogre, but the ogre could also PROBABLY solo you, etc etc. Playing solo just comes with very swingy gameplay, and any kind of save or lose effect on the player means an instant loss, since they have no party members to back them up. Anything with paralysis, significant ability damage, dominate etc becomes a "roll the dice to see if the game is over right now" encounter.

That's not a problem with a homebrew campaign but in an adventure module it's a different story. So while a level 1 PC can barely solo a wolf, if the game expects you to kill 13 wolves to level up as a 4man party, he'll level up after the 4th wolf and then level up again after like the 11th wolf he'll continue to accrue a level advantage until he's 4 levels above the encounters which is when it'll take 13 encounters to level up like normal.

You see what I'm getting at? Adventure modules don't change whether your party is 1man, 4man, or 6man. Same loot and same wealth.

[Pleh]

I originally had this thought, but decided to hold back on it.

Is it really so bad to just scale back the AP? I mean, taking the Wolves as an example, couldn't you rather easily reduce the number of wolves from 13 to 4 so that he ends up leveling at exactly the right time?

[Mike Miller]

I originally had this thought, but decided to hold back on it.

Is it really so bad to just scale back the AP? I mean, taking the Wolves as an example, couldn't you rather easily reduce the number of wolves from 13 to 4 so that he ends up leveling at exactly the right time?

You beat me to it. I was thinking the same thing. Just reduce the encounter rate. Wealth is probably more of a "wait and see" situation. If the wealth is all dropped from enemies, you have a different situation than if gold is handed out and many varied items are available for purchase (or craft).

[Crake]

I originally had this thought, but decided to hold back on it.

Is it really so bad to just scale back the AP? I mean, taking the Wolves as an example, couldn't you rather easily reduce the number of wolves from 13 to 4 so that he ends up leveling at exactly the right time?

Or alternatively, just let the player be 4 levels ahead. Most APs have some kind of driving force to stop the players from dawdling. If the player is a caster, the extra 4 levels will give the player the resources they need to actually keep going rather than stopping to rest after every second or third encounter. Sure, having 2 spell levels up is an advantage, but it's a limited one, unless they player can use their biggest guns in every encounter because they're getting to rest every moment.

Keep in mind though, that some encounters will involve many low level enemies, and for those encounters, being 4 levels ahead means quite possibly getting literally 0 xp.

[zlefin]

A solo spellcaster PC strong enough to take out an encounter designed for 4 PCs is going to end up 4 levels higher than the level the encounter is intended for. This doesn't work because a spellcaster with 2 higher spell levels than what the encounter expects is going to trivialize all encounters.

On the other hand, a PC receiving only 1/4 of the XP is always going to be at a significant disadvantage since the game is 4 times harder than it should be.

So where's the sweet spot? 100% is too much, 25% is too little.

I'm going to be running Age of Worms for a solo PC who has a great deal of system mastery.

Same question about Wealth. Would 400% wealth by level at 25%xp balance each other out? 100% Wealth and 50% xp?

being 4 levels higher (and hence with access to spells 2 levels higher) isn't a problem. Sure it can shut down some encounters quite well; but that PC has NO backup, they have to take care of every niche themselves, and they're at a severe action economy disadvantage.

combat will tend to be swingier than normal, and while it will go well alot, it can go very badly very easily. a single SoL could take out the whole party since it's just 1 person.

it actually will work out fine enough. (and a PC with high system mastery will likely make short work of any published module outside of tomb of horrors)

[MaxiDuRaritry]

it actually will work out fine enough. (and a PC with high system mastery will likely make short work of any published module outside of tomb of horrors)Even that isn't a guarantee if the player knows he's playing Tomb of Horrors.

[Troacctid]

Yeah, I feel like it makes a lot more sense to scale down the encounters rather than the xp. And if you are leaving the encounters as is, then it seems only fair that you should let the character be overleveled to compensate.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

You could always give the PC followers of slightly lower level and split the XP like normal. The player is in charge of the group but doesn't actually play the characters.

So, basically like Roy, really. :roy:

Or you could also allow them to be gestalt for 2 LA with one follower who is likewise? More abilities, but slower progression due to the (non-buyable) LA.

[gogogome]

I'm mostly worried about Planar Binding. If he hits level 9 while the encounters expect him to be level 5 then I think he's going to be destroying the encounters. Same with Planar Binding. 7th level encounters just aren't capable of handling a CR13 monster supported by a spellcaster.

I told him he's limited to one outsider from planar binding because if he binds an entire party complete with multiple spellcasters and still receive solo xp then there's no point in playing.

Am I being too cautious? Can 7th level encounters challenge an 11th level spellcaster with a CR 13 monster?

But if I do scale back xp like 50%, he'll be like 2 levels ahead instead of 4 and a 9th level encounter might challenge a CR13 monster or something like that.

Maybe I'll just force Gestalt on him like the other's suggested.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Go Tucker's Kobolds (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?155518-Tucker-s-Kobolds-PEACH-3-5) on his arse? If you're good at using the system tactically, you can give him a serious fight even if he's several levels higher than his enemies.

And if he uses planar binding on a large scale, feel free to turn it into a game of Battlefield Commander, with him pitting his forces against armies. Tell him that it's what you'll be doing if he grabs more than a minion or two.

[zlefin]

I'm mostly worried about Planar Binding. If he hits level 9 while the encounters expect him to be level 5 then I think he's going to be destroying the encounters. Same with Planar Binding. 7th level encounters just aren't capable of handling a CR13 monster supported by a spellcaster.

I told him he's limited to one outsider from planar binding because if he binds an entire party complete with multiple spellcasters and still receive solo xp then there's no point in playing.

Am I being too cautious? Can 7th level encounters challenge an 11th level spellcaster with a CR 13 monster?

But if I do scale back xp like 50%, he'll be like 2 levels ahead instead of 4 and a 9th level encounter might challenge a CR13 monster or something like that.

Maybe I'll just force Gestalt on him like the other's suggested.
the problem here isn't the amount of xp a solo hero would normally receive. That amount remains correct.
The problem here is you have a high system mastery player using known cheese. That will just roflstomp most modules, which are made for a far lower optimization level.
Based on his level of system mastery, I think if you gave him 4 appropriately leveled PCs he'd also roflstomp. (i.e. imagine if he had 4 level 9 casters and was facing a module meant for such a party; and each of his PCs was a caster with a planar bound monster)

[gogogome]

the problem here isn't the amount of xp a solo hero would normally receive. That amount remains correct.
The problem here is you have a high system mastery player using known cheese. That will just roflstomp most modules, which are made for a far lower optimization level.
Based on his level of system mastery, I think if you gave him 4 appropriately leveled PCs he'd also roflstomp. (i.e. imagine if he had 4 level 9 casters and was facing a module meant for such a party; and each of his PCs was a caster with a planar bound monster)

That's a great point and I agree with it.

So I guess the question then becomes "How much LA is this player's system mastery?"

In a game where he plays with other players I'll have to admit the challenge for him isn't "Can I beat the encounter" but instead "Can I beat the encounter before it kills a party member?" or "Can I beat the encounter without an enemy escaping?" because an escaped NPC is bad news for the quest.

[Troacctid]

I'm mostly worried about Planar Binding. If he hits level 9 while the encounters expect him to be level 5 then I think he's going to be destroying the encounters. Same with Planar Binding. 7th level encounters just aren't capable of handling a CR13 monster supported by a spellcaster.

I told him he's limited to one outsider from planar binding because if he binds an entire party complete with multiple spellcasters and still receive solo xp then there's no point in playing.
He's not supposed to get solo xp if he has a bunch of NPCs helping him. NPC allies take a full share of the experience points. (DMG 104)

[noob]

Go Tucker's Kobolds (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?155518-Tucker-s-Kobolds-PEACH-3-5) on his arse? If you're good at using the system tactically, you can give him a serious fight even if he's several levels higher than his enemies.

And if he uses planar binding on a large scale, feel free to turn it into a game of Battlefield Commander, with him pitting his forces against armies. Tell him that it's what you'll be doing if he grabs more than a minion or two.

I think a campaign about "I have X soldiers with Z powerset so how am I going to use them to get an advantage in battle t and what am I going to do against skirmish r on the village that would not weaken my formations on the main battlefront too much" can be interesting.

And Tucker kobolds are in fact now weak if you do not improve significantly their tactics since their tactics were adapted to the "player goes in the dungeon" playstyle and not the "Player starts sieging the dungeon and cutting the varied supply lines (for looting some food because it is always handy) with organized troops and divination spells for finding the entries(which are then guarded and possibly filled with deadly stuff(such as lava) because entering a dungeon is an overall bad idea relatively to just flooding it and making it break while outside of it) and also hypnotize the defeated kobolds that were outside to get intel playstyle"

[gogogome]

He's not supposed to get solo xp if he has a bunch of NPCs helping him. NPC allies take a full share of the experience points. (DMG 104)

That's an interesting point. I thought planar binding made hirelings not allies since they don't have class levels, they are subservient, and such. They're not adventurers and allies seem to require adventurers. Not to mention monsters usually don't have an ECL to calculate XP with.

[Jack_Simth]

A solo spellcaster PC strong enough to take out an encounter designed for 4 PCs is going to end up 4 levels higher than the level the encounter is intended for. This doesn't work because a spellcaster with 2 higher spell levels than what the encounter expects is going to trivialize all encounters.

On the other hand, a PC receiving only 1/4 of the XP is always going to be at a significant disadvantage since the game is 4 times harder than it should be.

So where's the sweet spot? 100% is too much, 25% is too little.

I'm going to be running Age of Worms for a solo PC who has a great deal of system mastery.

Same question about Wealth. Would 400% wealth by level at 25%xp balance each other out? 100% Wealth and 50% xp?
In general: Standard 100% will be fine. Seriously - starting at 1st, you'll mostly float to about 4 levels over target (after a few "expected" levels, anyway - I did the math a while back, you basically end up leveling 1.5 to 2 times per expected level until you hit that 4 levels higher mark, at which point it levels out... assuming CR=Expected Party Level encounters, anyway, which won't always be accurate). And also of note: A solo PC is considered a party of -4, which lines up.

But as noted by others: Fights will be VERY swingy. While he may very well be able to get his fort save into "don't roll a 1" territory against that basilisk (the stock is just DC 13, after all, so that'd be a +11 modifier), that nat-1 is a campaign ender (and would not be against a party of four). Solo strategy will usually end up being "play defensively" (or even better: "play remotely") as a result. If his character is on the line on a single die roll, he's already messed up big time. Expect the player to use disposable minions (animal companions, summons, zombies, skeletons, et cetera) and stealth (Ring of Invisibility, perhaps).

The big question - also as noted by others - is "how good is his system mastery, really?" ... and the answer to that is the real answer to your question.