[3.5] Defeating bad guys through gossip - XP or not?

[Altair_the_Vexed]

If a PC spreads rumours of mutiny among a lose band of villains, and backs up the rumours with staged examples and assassinations to the extent that the villains begin in-fighting with enough gusto to take out key bad guys - what XP does the PC get for the neutralised bad guys?

In a game I'm running, a PC has done just this: he's sent convincing messages to key villains to tell them their cohorts are planning mutiny, and then appeared disguised as a clear minion of one of the accused cohorts to assassinate key players in the band.
The mistrust and discord among the enemy has served the PC party well enough, but he iced the cake this session with a few more choice lies that I ruled have set the captains at each others' throats.

Do I award XP for defeating the captains who fell in the scuffle to the party, to the specific PC who planned the discord, or to no-one at all?

[SurlySeraph]

How about giving full XP to the party member who planned it and half XP to the rest? Defeating enemies without having to fight them is both creative and effective, and should be rewarded.

[imperialspectre]

If you give individual XP out, you could definitely give extra XP to the PC who instigated the gossip and such. I assume the rest of the party was involved, if only in a support role, and everyone should get some kind of ad hoc XP bonus for completing a part of the story or whatever. But really, this is one of those situations where it is completely your call.

However, I'd suggest that you not give out XP for "defeating" the captains altogether, as any surviving enemies could be used as antagonists later and should therefore be XP rewards when they're actually killed. Just award XP for the threats that are actually eliminated.

Sounds like you have some pretty cool players. Have fun with that.

[Shpadoinkle]

You get XP for overcoming challenges. The PCs overcame the challenge, they should get full XP for it.

[woodenbandman]

did the PC make forgery checks? If they did, then XP. If not, maybe half XP.

[Tsotha-lanti]

Full XP to the party. Overcoming challenges is always overcoming challenges, and there's rarely any good reason to award different amounts to different PCs.

[ericgrau]

I'd figure out what challenges the PCs needed or might have wanted to overcome, and award them full xp as if they had done so by physical force. I'd divide the xp evenly across the party just like everyone else, with perhaps a small bonus to the person who came up with the plan.

If that's a crazy amount of xp then that PC is either a genius (doubtful) or you played the baddies as way too gullible or too lousy at investigating.

Regardless of the exact amount you decide on, be sure to reward the PCs for getting past challenges via methods other than fighting. Otherwise they'll just solve everything with fighting, and that's not as interesting.

[Vortling]

Definitely award them a goodly amount of xp for defeating the captains in this way. Don't grant too varying amounts but you can give a bonus to the main planner so your players know that good ideas are rewarded.

[seedjar]

I'd give them XP for any battles as normal and some lump sum for the stuff outside the staged fights or whatnot. That's really good gameplay and it deserves a reward. You could justify giving full XP for it, but I would probably scale it back some, depending on just how many "defeats" you're willing to attribute to the events. What are we talking - 10? Dozens? I'd probably only count major NPCs or near-party-EL monsters as part of the XP reward.
I think it should be somehow proportionate to the number of antagonists that now have to regroup as a result of the PCs disrupting their previous schemes. (I'm not one for tracking XP closely, but this is the kind of victory I would reward with a level bump.)
~Joe

[JaxGaret]

Just going to chime in and say that yes, they should get full XP for defeating the bad guys in this manner.

[SilverClawShift]

Reminds me of the "some DMs occasionally use an XP system that is not inherently based on murder" quote.

[Mushroom Ninja]

The PCs overcame the challenge put before them ergo they deserve XP.

Simple.

[Pronounceable]

They, and especially the crafty one, deserve MORE than combat xp they'd get for killing them. Golden rping should be rewarded accordingly.

[Asheram]

They, and especially the crafty one, deserve MORE than combat xp they'd get for killing them. Golden rping should be rewarded accordingly.

I quite agree. Considering, even if they didn't stand at direct risk, they still got no loot from the whole ordeal.

As well as

Heroic Achivement: A crook among thieves
The gift of gab runs strong within you, and lies come like second nature when talking to liars.
You gain a +1 circumstancial bonus to both diplomacy and bluff when speaking to criminals

[Saph]

It's completely up to you, and it depends on what sort of behaviour you want to encourage.

If you like the PCs solving their problems by other means than violence, give them XP. If you don't, don't.

That said, you shouldn't give them TOO much for one low-risk plan, even if it did work out brilliantly. Not more than 20%-30% of a level.

- Saph

[Dunkelhand]

Check the skill challenge involved. Award XP for the appropriate ECL.
Remember that they don't get the XP based on the level of the guys that were defeated, but on what they have accomplished / learned.

If you place 10 level 20 NPCs in a magical secured cage and place a 1000 ton stone above those NPCs, and the players just press the button to kill those NPCs, they get XP based on the difficulty of the encounter, not based on the creatures they killed.

If the diplomat of the group started some rumors, and you used skill challenges or something equivalent to skill challenges and if there is/was a risk involved for the character, then I'd award XP equivalent to an encounter on the same level for the group. If there was no risk involved, I don't think I'd award XP.

In your case the question is: how hard was it for the group? And what goals did they actually accomplish? If they simply made sure that one bad guy was replaced by another bad guy, that's not really worth anything.

If the bad guys are nervous, they are normally more trigger happy leading to more civil casualties as well. Kill their favorite armor smith (he was working for the wrong guys), burn down their favorite inn (didn't want to pay to several factions of the gang, etc.)
Not to punish them, put I don't think that gang wars (I think this is what happened) are a good thing.

The risk:reward ratio must be fitting. And if there was no real danger for them (say because the bad guys never tried to find out who started the talk that started the trouble or because all of the trouble stayed inside the organization) the reward they get is the changed state of the balance of power/terror.
If they were in risk (disguised character in the thieves guild planting rumors while risking his life, thugs looking for the guys asking the questions, etc) they should get XP according to the difficulty of these non-combat encounters.

[Triaxx]

Agreed. In situations like this, I typically give a 5-10% bonus for the originator. Not enough to be jealous of, but enough to encourage in the future.

[only1doug]

Do I award XP for defeating the captains who fell in the scuffle to the party, to the specific PC who planned the discord, or to no-one at all?

The Xp goes to the surviving captain, who killed the others.

(some XP for plan to party members who helped in anyway (including planning), slightly more for originator of plan. but not to the scale of what fighting them would have been worth)

The mistrust and discord among the enemy has served the PC party well enough, but he iced the cake this session with a few more choice lies that I ruled have set the captains at each others' throats.

But ultimately has he not made the survivors stronger? even if they don't know of the PC's role in causing the in-fighting, now instead of having a factionalised criminal system you have one strong leader who controls everything. (unless you want to make life easy for the PCs and keep the factions but have them all weakened for the PCs to easily mop up)

[Curmudgeon]

Shortest answer: Yes.

Short answer: Way to go, PCs!

[SydneyLosstarot]

I'd say yes.
Maybe i'd give them more than for combat.

It's really cool when the game gets social.
I mean, what kind of world it is where manslaughter is the only way to solve problems?

[icefractal]

Full XP to the planner, slightly reduced XP to the rest. They overcame the challenge, they get the reward.

Really, if you only award XP for things that are "risky" enough, it's like putting a big sign on your campaign "don't use smart solutions". I mean, do you really want this?
Player 1: "So we could use our contacts in the merchant's guild to find out when the fortress is recieving shipments, hire some thugs to stage a mock ambush on the caravan while we sneak inside the crates, wait until the crates are taken to storage, climb up the abandoned dumbwaiter shaft to the tower, assassinate the evil duke, steal the invasion plans, and be out before his guards realize what's happened."
Player 2: "But that would only be one fight - and he might be asleep, so no risk, no XP. We'd better walk up to the front door and start fighting people until we've slaughtered the entire fortress - that way we get full XP".
Player 1: "Yeah, I guess so. Maybe we should take off our armor first so it's more risky."

And as for dropping a huge boulder on 1,000 orcs, you don't get XP for that. Not because it wasn't risky, but because killing the orcs wasn't a challenge that you overcame. Now capturing those orcs in the first place might have been, assuming you had an actual reason for it.

[Satyr]

They, and especially the crafty one, deserve MORE than combat xp they'd get for killing them. Golden rping should be rewarded accordingly.

Amen. Clever tactics and outsmarting of foes should always be more awarding than brute violence.

[Dunkelhand]

Full XP to the planner, slightly reduced XP to the rest. They overcame the challenge, they get the reward.

I disagree. Give XP for the challenges they faced. Not for the final results. If a player tells king X that king y said he sucks, and king X starts a war, than the player doesn't get the XP for everybody killed in the war.

In the best case they get XP for the skill challenge.

In the example outlined above, I think there should have been a lot of drawbacks (again: Gang Wars are not fun), no real goal achieved (one bad guy is replaced by another bad guy, henchman running loose on the streets) - so I don't see that they actually accomplished a goal at all. I'd be giving them XP for the skill challenges involved though.

[horseboy]

I disagree. Give XP for the challenges they faced. Not for the final results. If a player tells king X that king y said he sucks, and king X starts a war, than the player doesn't get the XP for everybody killed in the war.

In the best case they get XP for the skill challenge.

In the example outlined above, I think there should have been a lot of drawbacks (again: Gang Wars are not fun), no real goal achieved (one bad guy is replaced by another bad guy, henchman running loose on the streets) - so I don't see that they actually accomplished a goal at all. I'd be giving them XP for the skill challenges involved though.

And people wonder where D&D got it's reputation as the game of "I kill it and take it's stuff."

[xanaphia]

XP should be rewarded for the people killed, but it should be made clear to the players if their actions killed any innocents.

Alternatively, you can treat it differently. For example, you could figure out the difficulty of fighting all the baddies at once. That XP is awarded when the last one is killed, by any means. So if I trick them all into jumping off a cliff, or you get them to kill each other and half of them die, then the other half you kill, then they get full XP.

Also, I'd say that the mastermind gets 3 shares of XP, but only if in your games all players get this opportunity. Skew it so that characters get XP in combat only for helping, but make it up to the diplomat by giving him XP somewhere else.

[Dunkelhand]

And people wonder where D&D got it's reputation as the game of "I kill it and take it's stuff."

Nah. But you get out what you put in.

You tell barmaid Linda that her friend (who is by accident 8 levels above your level) kissed another girl. Now, due to a line of incidents she makes sure the guy gets killed. Who gets the XP? The player or the person who actually kills the guy?

Or to put i in a different way: Wizard Foo tells Lord Bar that there is an evildoer in the lands. King hires party. Party defeats evildoer. Who gets the XP? The wizard (who talked to the king which basically triggered the events) or the party?

To put it in a different way: Start rumors and you get XP for starting the rumors. If this is a tough task, I'd grant them XP for an encounter of avg. party level +x.

Disguise yourself, craft yourself some documents, sneak yourself into a the thieves guild, plant hints there, start rumors pointing towards these hints and you"ll get XP equal to the ECL of the guards and traps of the place, for crafting the hints and planting the rumors.

The PCs are rewarded for what they do. It's as easy as this. Convincing somebody might be a tough task. If so, grant XP accordingly.

If you start handing out xp for follow-up effects, you're open for trouble. Party kills evildoer. Evildoer cannot kill cleric Sunnyshinyhero. Will the party get XP for everything Sunnyshinyhero does from now on? If they hadn't saved him, he wouldn't be able to do all this great stuff, right?

But it doesn't work that way. You get XP for what you do. And for the direct effects of that. You might get other benefits (friends in high places, connections to the thieves guild, what ever) as well. But you get XP for what you do.

Trolls guarding the bridge wanting gold? If you manage to get over the bridge you get the XP for passing the obstacle. In that case it doesn't matter how you got past the trolls. You used diplomacy or intimidate? Great. Full XP for you.

But telling the guards in a nearby town that there are trolls at the bridge and waiting until the guards dispatch the problem won't grant the same XP. Why? Easy: No risk involved. It's almost the same as the GM saying that the trolls left the bridge to get some food just before the PCs arrived. No challenge, no XP.
If the PCs decide to hide in the bushes to see if the trolls leave their posts... well, then it gets borderline. I'd give them some XP, but not full XP since they didn't face the challenge. Well, to be honest, I'd ensure that this wouldn't happen.. I guess I"d let some other travelers come close to the bridge, forcing the PCs to do something - and if it's just warning the other travelers.

But the reward has to be in a relation to the risk and effort, or there wouldn't be much fun.

[Waspinator]

I judge it by the risk involved. If there was a reasonable chance of failure that would result in the PCs getting caught and possibly killed by the enemy, I'd give them the XP even if they didn't directly fight them.

[zerombr]

if the PC effectively destroyed the villians plans, the same as if defeating them in combat, he is due the xps for it. Routing, Capture and exposing an evil noble's plans are all types of defeat, this is no different.

[horseboy]

Nah. But you get out what you put in.

You tell barmaid Linda that her friend (who is by accident 8 levels above your level) kissed another girl. Now, due to a line of incidents she makes sure the guy gets killed. Who gets the XP? The player or the person who actually kills the guy?

The PC's. NPC's don't get XP.
If the goal is the removal of her friend then they get full xp for fulfilling that goal. They pull it off with good role playing, like that, then they get that amount again for good rp xp. The person who comes up with the scheme gets oh, 200-300 bonus idea XP. Just because Bobby never cracked open Venture's nugget doesn't mean they never got XP for defeating him.

[icefractal]

Their goal was to get rid of the gang, they got rid of it. Except for the one surviving captain, who they wouldn't get XP for. Why is personally stabbing the gang members better, and worthy of more reward, than taking them down by subterfuge?

Because that's what it boils down to - XP isn't ultimately about challenge or risk or success, it's about reward. When the players come up with a plan to capture the evil duke, stop his invasion, and prove his guilt, through subterfuge and stealth, without fighting any of his guards or soldiers, which is your response?
A) "That's a cool plan, I'm glad they came up with a creative solution."
B) "Damnit, they just bypassed a bunch of fights."

If it's A, then give them full XP, and you encourage them to keep coming up with "outside the box" plans. If it's B, give them much less XP, and they'll realize that they should seek out all the battles and avoid bypassing any.