EXP multiplier for large parties?

[Garresh]

So I have a party of 7-9 players depending on schedules, and I've noticed it makes combat take a LOT longer than in smaller games. This means that either combat eats up a larger portion of the session, or the players get less exp per day. Has anyone considered an exp multiplier for larger parties to offset this?

[Tanarii]

Award based on adjusted XP of the enemies, ie the value used to determine difficulty. In other words, 3-6 enemies are worth double their XP, and 7-12 worth 2.5 their XP.

(I did this by accident for a long time since I thought it was the standard rule.)

[MaxWilson]

So I have a party of 7-9 players depending on schedules, and I've noticed it makes combat take a LOT longer than in smaller games. This means that either combat eats up a larger portion of the session, or the players get less exp per day. Has anyone considered an exp multiplier for larger parties to offset this?

No, but you could use high-CR monsters to achieve the same thing. I've used high-CR monsters as XP rewards before, not against large parties. 9 PCs around 8th level should straight-up murder 2 CR 16 Iron Golems and a CR 13 Beholder, and they'll each gain about 4500 XP, which is a third of the way to ninth level! That means you can make combats relatively rare (30% of table time?).

Go ahead and use plenty of Slaads, Glabrezus, Narzugons, Death Knights, etc., and plenty of noncombat stuff too.

Your biggest problem with a large group isn't monsters though, it's the initiative system forcing each player to sit still and not even talk to the DM 90% of the time during combat because it "isn't your turn." Switching to some form of group initiative or old-school initiative (everybody declares including monsters, then everybody acts and starts rolling dice including initiative contests if necessary) can help. You may also want to have players elect a leader or something who can keep track of their action declarations and status conditions and making sure no one accidentally gets no action this round, etc. for you, so that you the DM can focus on the monsters during combat.


Award based on adjusted XP of the enemies, ie the value used to determine difficulty. In other words, 3-6 enemies are worth double their XP, and 7-12 worth 2.5 their XP.

(I did this by accident for a long time since I thought it was the standard rule.)

I did this briefly but (1) it was way too much XP. Players could gain multiple levels in one adventure and I had to make up rules about how quickly they could "process" experience. (2) It made it matter too much how I did the accounting. Is one goblin cave with goblins at both ends one encounter or two? Does the answer change if the PCs adopt a sneaky approach, or wait for some goblins to wander off on their own? Normally it doesn't matter how the DM eyeballs difficulty but under this rule it did, and I don't like that.

Also I didn't like how it could penalize PCs for fighting smart.

[Dork_Forge]

Personally I'd use a milestone or simialr system instead of XP, but both of the solutions presented by Tanarii and Max Wilson seem like viable options.

Just a word of warning on the example encounter though, monster abilities/effects can make things a lot harder than intended when paired with other monsters. Depending on your party composition and how tactically you play your monsters, your players may end up getting murdered by those Iron Golems if the Beholder just postions its main eye for maximum coverage and the golems go to town on defenseless casters.

[MaxWilson]

Just a word of warning on the example encounter though, monster abilities/effects can make things a lot harder than intended when paired with other monsters. Depending on your party composition and how tactically you play your monsters, your players may end up getting murdered by those Iron Golems if the Beholder just postions its main eye for maximum coverage and the golems go to town on defenseless casters.

Agreed, that is not impossible if the party is primarily spellcasters, and if they fail to exit the antimagic zone or kill the beholder. I'm guessing that there's more of a 50/50 warrior/wizard mix when I predict a straightforward (but exciting!) victory for the PCs, but I could be wrong.

It's just an example though, and BTW the PCs would get the same amount of XP if they fought the beholder separately from the Iron Golems. Maybe their reward for finding the right secret door (by finding a map, or negotiating with the right NPCs, or searching in the right place--always provide at least three ways for players to succeed!) is getting to sneak in and kill the beholder in its bedroom, and not have to fight the Iron Golems until afterwards when they are carrying away the treasure!

[Tanarii]

I did this briefly but (1) it was way too much XP. Players could gain multiple levels in one adventure and I had to make up rules about how quickly they could "process" experience. (2) It made it matter too much how I did the accounting. Is one goblin cave with goblins at both ends one encounter or two? Does the answer change if the PCs adopt a sneaky approach, or wait for some goblins to wander off on their own? Normally it doesn't matter how the DM eyeballs difficulty but under this rule it did, and I don't like that.

Also I didn't like how it could penalize PCs for fighting smart.I like it (still) because I've already calcuated the XP for an encounter so I can reference the difficulty vs any given party. It also means that a (for example) Medium Difficulty fight is worth N XP, regardless of it it's a single creature or 12. Which makes a heck of a lot more sense, since it's theoretically the same difficulty.

It's definitely fast advancement, but it means the adventuring day XP matches the speed of gaining levels XP, as opposed to being from (typically IMC) some variation of 1/1.5 to 1/2.5 the amount of XP gained, depending on if the number of creatures in the encounters. (Not that my players consistently face one adventuring day per session or anything.)

[MaxWilson]

I like it (still) because I've already calcuated the XP for an encounter so I can reference the difficulty vs any given party. It also means that a (for example) Medium Difficulty fight is worth N XP, regardless of it it's a single creature or 12. Which makes a heck of a lot more sense, since it's theoretically the same difficulty.

It's definitely fast advancement, but it means the adventuring day XP matches the speed of gaining levels XP, as opposed to being from (typically IMC) some variation of 1/1.5 to 1/2.5 the amount of XP gained, depending on if the number of creatures in the encounters. (Not that my players consistently face one adventuring day per session or anything.)

Glad it works for you. It's certainly no more illogical than any other form of kill-for-XP leveling. It just didn't fit my style.

[Aett_Thorn]

I’m going to second the vote for milestone XP. In this case, it just might make more sense to make it so that they level up when it makes narrative sense instead of holding them to the XP rates.

[Dork_Forge]

Another thing your table could benefit from OP is streamlining combat, especially since your party is so large. Roll to hit and damage together (or damage whilst you roll saves), roll one (or a set) of initiative at the beginning of the session so you can flow into encounters a lot faster.