[D20 General] Why track XP?

[Kiero]

This is something I'm wondering about, and I'd appreciate some views on it. From where I'm sitting, tracking XP seems a fairly pointless bit of accounting. In the more modern D20 games, there are no differences in advancement rates between classes. Often the whole party is awarded the same XP, because the romp around together. Invariably the way the challenge system is structured is to specifically give out advancement at given rates. It's also generally seen as bad form to have groups with widely disparate levels amongst PCs.

So why bother with the charade of counting it up? Why not just have the GM give out advances at pre-agreed intervals? Does it give people some kind of sense of control knowing how far away they are from the next level? Would people behave differently if they couldn't see their actions directly resulting in reward?

[edcalaban]

In a few games I've played, the DM will award XP for things such as good roleplaying, actions one PC alone took part in, etc. Also, some DMs don't award XP to PCs that weren't at a session.
And remember that in some D20 settings you can use XP for various things other than just leveling - the Black Company setting comes to mind, with XP consumed to create magical items. So it isn't always pointless accounting, sometimes it's necessary to keep with the setting.

[Fax Celestis]

When I award XP in my games, I also allow the players to hand out awards. These awards are fixed at 10% of the value of XP handed out. Each player is allowed to award one other player the award, and it has to be for a qualified reason that I, the DM, agree to. A player can't receive an award for the same act twice, but they can get multiple awards in an evening.

What this does is it rewards the players directly for doing awesome things or pulling through in a pinch without me, the DM, having to ad hoc anything. It also occasionally causes one player to pull slightly ahead in terms of XP--usually the more active the player, the more awards they receive.

[Kiero]

In at least some games, the GM will award XP for things such as good roleplaying, actions one PC alone took part in, etc. Also, some DMs don't award XP to PCs that weren't at a session.
And remember that in some D20 settings you can use XP for various things other than just leveling - the Black Company setting comes to mind, with XP consumed to create magical items.

Ironic thing is XP "rewards" can often end up reinforcing the dynamic you already have; the people who are engaged get more engaged, and the people who are less so become more frustrated because they're being left behind. I'm not surprised that more recent games are moving away from individual rewards and looking much more towards ensuring everyone gets something.

Not giving XP for non-attendance is positively awful, IMO. Playing is it's own reward, not getting to play is punishment enough. Disparate power levels because not everyone can maintain a regular schedule week-in, week-out is a recipe for un-fun.

Take the point on XP-for-creation. Not a design decision I agree with, mind, but it's valid.

[Saph]

Sometimes it's nice to level up by the encounter rules, instead of because the GM says so. Feels less arbitrary.

If we're playing 3.5, you can also use XP to make stuff, which I personally enjoy. And our old DM used to give out small amounts of XP for funny/cool/well-RPed things in game, with short explanations. I always liked those. Oh, and then there's the satisfaction of your party killing/beating something which is WAY stronger than we should have been able to defeat, and then getting an astronomical amount of XP. That's FAR more satisfying than having the DM just say "Okay, you go up a level".

Come to think of it, I actually much prefer tracking XP to the alternatives.

- Saph

[Jasdoif]

I think the combination of XP acquisition and CR is supposed to make it easier for the GM. CR helps the GM pick appropriate creatures for the encounters, and XP lessens/removes the GM's need to constantly wonder "Do I level them now?" It may not be a big deal to experienced GMs, but for a beginner it lessens a lot of guesswork.

Beyond that, it does provide a means to measure their characters' progress. Jumping from one level to the next can be quite an abrupt change in power, and though mechanically it's still the same when dependent on XP accumulation it at least feels like a more gradual process.

[Kiero]

While I can kind of see the "helping new GMs pace things" on the advancement side, I don't see that challenge ratings need to be tied to XP at all. At least not in terms of what the GM is giving out. It still works perfectly well to help gauge what is an appropriate encounter. And there are still games which don't do it; True20 for example doesn't do XP at all.

Given the number of intervals you already get (20-30 levels), I really don't think adding even smaller ones of nXP really makes a lot of difference. It's below my interest threshold; it's like counting the pennies when I'm spending thousands of pounds; it just doesn't matter to me.

As to arbitrariness, I trust my GM, and I can't say I'm that bothered that levelling at his whim is arbitrary. I'd be much happier to dispense with the pointless accounting, and focus even more on the character-level stuff, rather than the mechanics.

If it's not a new level, frankly I don't care. And in any case, I'm more interested in the in-character effects of what's going on than the mechanics of advancement.

[Fax Celestis]

Frankly, if that's how you feel, then I'm afraid you're likely in the minority.

[Kiero]

Frankly, if that's how you feel, then I'm afraid you're likely in the minority.

Can't say that's ever worried me.

[Fax Celestis]

Can't say that's ever worried me.

As an aside, from a mechanical perspective (and more so in classless games like WoD or Exalted), XP is necessary as a balancing mechanic, since each point is potentially a miniature level all in its own.

[Grail]

I have a spreadsheet that I use to track XP. i don't tell players how much XP they've got, i keep it secret, and tell them when they go up a level. I award XP based on the following:

Challenges: the traditional defeat the monster or overcome the trap, all characters involved in this encounter gain an equal share.

Roleplaying: players gain XP for roleplaying during the session based on their current level. This is an individual award.

Ideas: players gain XP for coming up with ideas during the session based on their current level, this is different from Roleplaying in that Roleplaying is playing in character, Ideas is coming up with tactics, or even just really simple plots to help either overcome a challenge or move towards a story goal. This is an individual award.

Story Rewards: players gain XP for reaching a Story Goal. This is a base value depending on what they have achieved. All characters gain the same amount.

Miscellaneous: players gain a small amount of XP for individual brilliance, moments of presicence or just making the game more enjoyable for everyone else. This is an individual award.

Roleplaying/Ideas is done with a simple formula:
Poor: 0x current level
Average: 20x current level
Good: 40x current level
Excellent: 80x current level

I encourage my players to roleplay well and be involved in the planning of the games. I have and continually reinforced the fact that the better they do this, the more xp they will gain.

This system has worked well in the many years that i've been running d20 games, and whilst the better roleplayers earn more XP, it does have a flow-on effect of encouraging others to improve theirs.

[RPGuru1331]

Ironic thing is XP "rewards" can often end up reinforcing the dynamic you already have; the people who are engaged get more engaged, and the people who are less so become more frustrated because they're being left behind. I'm not surprised that more recent games are moving away from individual rewards and looking much more towards ensuring everyone gets something.

If people aren't engaged, you have some sort of other problem going on though, don't you? I don't agree with it in d20 (It's too small!) but in other games where you can add an exp or 3 and it's relevant but not too much..

In D20, I just say "Yo'ure level X". There's no point in more effort.

[JaxGaret]

There's magic item creation, which costs XP. It's pretty tough to adjudicate that if you don't track individual experience points.

There are also some other activities which cost XP, such as casting certain spells. IIRC there are some templates that do this as well.

[Talic]

I use XP to give the players some control in the rate of advancement.

Frequent forays into the land of "awesome" and "win" yield better party XP, and a faster advancement rate.

If players are getting by, and it's not particularly awesome, the XP rewards to the party are smaller, slowing the advancement rate.

Thus, the best way to become epic is to BE epic.

[Kiero]

As an aside, from a mechanical perspective (and more so in classless games like WoD or Exalted), XP is necessary as a balancing mechanic, since each point is potentially a miniature level all in its own.

We're not talking about classless games, that's why I specifically tagged the topic "D20 General", not "General". I'm largely talking about D&D4e and SWSE (thus the reference to "modern" D20 games).

No, each point isn't a "level" of it's own, since until you hit the magical target number, there's no effect whatsoever. You've already got the necessary and important intervals in the system - they're called levels.

As before, all tracking each point does is add some useless accounting at a level of granularity that adds nothing.

[Roderick_BR]

No.
It's not a charade.
It's not useless accounting.
It does add something.

Keeping track of your character advancement.
In a typical table game (as in, not online/etc), I want to say how much experience each character gets (from multiples sources, not only encounter and campaign).
It sucks when you hardly do something, solve puzzle after puzzle, or fight battle after battle... and all the DM do is "you go up a level".

So, if you don't like, don't use it. Don't repeat over and over that it's useless because it's not useless to others. Repeating it won't make it true.

[RPGuru1331]

It sucks when you hardly do something, solve puzzle after puzzle, or fight battle after battle... and all the DM do is "you go up a level".

Why? If we're to discuss misusing it, mightn't I say that a GM can hand out too much experience for loitering?

[Saph]

As to arbitrariness, I trust my GM, and I can't say I'm that bothered that levelling at his whim is arbitrary. I'd be much happier to dispense with the pointless accounting, and focus even more on the character-level stuff, rather than the mechanics.

If you're seriously interested in learning why other people play differently from you, it's probably a good idea to avoid adjectives like 'pointless' and 'useless'.

But if you want a more detailed explanation, I've played in games that didn't track XP, and others that did. Here's how the XP accounting worked in each case:

First Game

GM: "You all go up a level."
Us: "Cool."

Second Game

GM: "Roth, Callus, and Dent get 2,562 XP for this week's session. Niriel, Drift, and Jinx get 3,125."
Roth's player: "Why do we get less? Oh, because they're a level lower."
Callus' player: "That's all? What about the cryohydra?"
GM: "It was only CR 8. It's not THAT high. Most of your XP came from the ice elemental."
Roth's player: "Well, yeah, that was much tougher with the DR."
Niriel's player: "What about the white pudding?"
GM: "CR 6."
Niriel's player: "That's all?"
GM: "Yup. It was only so dangerous because you were at close range."
Niriel's player: "Oh, okay."
Dent's player: "Let's find something tougher to fight next time."

It should be pretty obvious why some players prefer the first style, and some prefer the second.

- Saph

[valadil]

Depends on the type of game. If a DM is willing to have characters play at different levels, there's a need to track XP. Personally I prefer to keep my players at the same level but I've been quite happy in games where DMs don't do this. XP varies as players miss sessions or craft magic items (not sure if this matters in d20 modern). Some DMs even give out bonus XP for good roleplay, journals, or back story. Oh and character death. If someone dies they get set back a bit. New characters can come in one level below the lowest in the party. It's just another way to play.

[Simanos]

It's kind of weird that in AD&D making magic items gave you XP. Now in D&D 3rd edition it takes your XP. I understand the reasoning though. It became rather easy now. I sort of prefer the new system. I'm not a big fan of settings where the present is always a lesser version of the ancient past (where all the cool stuff happened).

[Morty]

If you're seriously interested in learning why other people play differently from you, it's probably a good idea to avoid adjectives like 'pointless' and 'useless'.

This. Asking people for their opinion only to dismiss it doesn't look good.
That said, the main advantage I see in keeping track of XP is that in a combat-heavy game such as D&D it simply makes is much easier to adjust the challenges. Now, CR system doesn't work particularily well, but it's still better than just eyeballing the challenges players are supposed to face which leads to either TPKs or players rolling over encounters.
Also, although you'll probably dismiss it as "pointless", some people do like it when they can add more and more to XP on their character sheet as the new level draws closer.

[Medic]

Our GM says:

"Hey next time bring level X+1 characters and don't forget to bring me a new sheet for the folder"

Personally its fine I just don't like how that situation leads to leveling slower then we should (AKA fights would reward more exp then he is obviously giving)

If you can avoid making players feel like no matter what they kill they won't level til you're good and ready its a lot better.

[Satyr]

Keeping XP is important to keep the difference between players. XP are a kind of reward for the player's achievements and those have to be kept individually to keep track of each player's efforts for the game. A player who puts more dedication into the game, come up with the cleverest plans or embodied his or her role the best deserves to be rewarded for the dedication, as the dull casual gamer who never contributes to the game certainly does not deserve an equal treatment.
Treating everybody the same is one of the most unfair things to do.
Besides, XP (and on a similar note, almost anything a character could gain in a game, including gold, magical items etc.) should always be regarded as a reward and not be taken for granted. If it is earned sweat, blood and pain (metaphorically speaking), it is precious. Free giveaways are worthless and cheapen the reward.

[AslanCross]

I have two reasons:
1. It gives the players a sense of reward and anticipation. "Oh yes, I'm going to level up soon!" I think it adds more meaning to leveling up than the arbitrary "Oh, you guys level up." I've done both in the same campaign, though. I usually stick to the XP model, but at times I need to bump them up a level to avoid them getting crushed.

2. Item creation. It doesn't figure into our campaigns much, but even Wizards would like to scribe scrolls every now and then.

[Samakain]

I can only comment on my own experiences, but if the group i regularly DM for was denied there XP Cookies, i would be drawn, qaurtered, skinned, burn and raised on a freaking pike for all to witness my sins >.>

However i do see some advantages in the Non-XP concepts of some games/dms, but there not for me, i prefer some modicum of referance when i'm playing, some measure with which to keep score, and i like giving out a tangible reward when my players excel.

A comment was made earlier that doing action-based reward xp, aka someone does something cool, funny, clever, they get a bonus and it being counter productive to those members who maybe aren't as loud, obnoxious or stupidly heroic :P.

And yeah this is true, it puts off people who are maybe new to the game and not to sure of speaking up yet, or the quiet members of the crew, or whatever dynamic is sitting behind the dude with the drizzle clone who has 54 ranks in tumble and has no concept of an "indoor voice".

I handled it like Talic mentioned here earlier, action based reward goes to the group, bigger rewards are handed out for teamwork funkiness than anything else.

I also stole an old idea from an old GM of mine recently. Chocolate Gold Coins of various sizes. Each with a value of xp written on the front, from 25-50-75-100-200, i gave each player different amounts of these and they hand them to other players for actions they think merit it.
the idea follows the following equation

Xp + Gold + Chocolate Snacks / D&D party = Win


that is all

Sa

[Yahzi]

I treat XP like gold (1 xp = 5 gp, just like the book says). You can trade XP for gold and you can trade gold for XP.

This makes tracking XP fun, because the players get to decide how to spend it. You want levels? Equipment? Magic items? Followers? It's your resource - you manage it.

That's what makes the game fun, after all: decisions. If the DM makes the decision when and how you level, it removes an element of fun.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Well, the XP system as presented in 3e is there to stay because
(1) You can take away from your XP through a variety of ways already mentioned.
(2) XP advancement may have been normalized class-by-class, but it wasn't normalized level-by-level.

In general, XP is there to stay because people like getting receiving artificial rewards for their fantasy hijinks. Honestly the XP mechanic seems much less attached to 4e than 3e. If you wanted an XP-less 4e system, you could do it with ease.

[Kiero]

This. Asking people for their opinion only to dismiss it doesn't look good.
That said, the main advantage I see in keeping track of XP is that in a combat-heavy game such as D&D it simply makes is much easier to adjust the challenges. Now, CR system doesn't work particularily well, but it's still better than just eyeballing the challenges players are supposed to face which leads to either TPKs or players rolling over encounters.

There's nothing in how the CR system works that requires XP to actually be given out. The two things are independent of one another, all you need to make the equation work are the character's levels.

[Satyr]

A comment was made earlier that doing action-based reward xp, aka someone does something cool, funny, clever, they get a bonus and it being counter productive to those members who maybe aren't as loud, obnoxious or stupidly heroic :P.

And yeah this is true, it puts off people who are maybe new to the game and not to sure of speaking up yet, or the quiet members of the crew, or whatever dynamic is sitting behind the dude with the drizzle clone who has 54 ranks in tumble and has no concept of an "indoor voice".

Which is another example why it can be tremendously unfair to treat everybody the same way; when Mr. Egocentric plays himself up, it is much less impressive as if an introvert player comes out and takes he lead of the party - which is certainly more worth and should be rewarded.
I fear that the abandonment of XP leads to the uniform treatment of players - which is as unwise as it is unfair. Players deserve an individual treatment, and rewards for exceptional greatness.

[Knaight]

That said you can use a different XP method. I really don't like 3.5s, it seems needlessly complex, as smaller numbers would have worked just as well, and the I'm not a fan of gaining Xp in combat particularly. Then you get the best of both worlds, no real work, and you can still give out XP awards.