I wanted to know if anyone of you is using an alternative way to reward experience to players.I am sick of all the combat-based XP as it leads the players to kill everything instead of concentrating on adventures objectives and finding alternative solutions to one problem....
I decided some time ago that I would only reward players from now on their roleplaying skills , completion of adventure and personal objectives , as well as the success of the session (I mean , in terms of good cooperation and fun for everyone around the table). For me , combat is a part of all that , and not the supreme goal of it all (Of course , killing the big boss can still be a scenario objective , as well as other sorts of combat , but hacking and slashing inferior NPCs or situations just piss me off and bore players I think after a while)
So now here's my system : I reward my players with Adventure Points instead of basic XP , that I converted like that : Level 2 is 5 Adv.Pts , Level 3 10 Adv.Pts ,etc.Each time the players attain a level , the Adv.Pts are erased and it starts again..For rules concerning XP , like some spells , just divide the gap of XP between each level by the number of Adv.Points. Typical reward for me is 1-4 points per adventure , 1-2 points per good to excellent roleplaying , and 1 point for general fun and success of the session . I feel my players are now more concentrating on "living" the adventure rather than just slaughtering the world...And I'm pretty glad about that !!!
So I wanted your opinion and own home rules to see how you do with your players or masters....See you !
PS : I think that all roleplaying games fanatics will recognize an inspiration from the Alternity XP system (I miss that game....). And they're right !!! ;))
I have nothing to offer as substitue. I just want to say that I agree.
Experience should be rewarded if objectives are attained, not for killing a hippogriff on the way to the next village. Characters should be trying to avoid fights rather than charging at everything in the country side.
Maybe we should add up all the experience for an adventure, and devide between a number of objectives, with each objective being a percentage of what it represents in the overall story.
Hmmm...
Ultradan
Currently I'm using the RAW on XP, but I'm highly considering switching to this system.
Another system I'm looking at has differing rewards for nominal, satisfactory, substantial, and outstanding roleplaying for categories such as defeating/surviving an encounter, good ideas that fail, good ideas that succeed that are implemented by self or another, and creative uses of skills and class features outside of combat. I'm not sure who wrote it originally so I'm hesitant to post the work.
Handing out XP depends entirely on the scope of the campaign or adventure that is being run. If the group is using a canned adventure, they are designed to progress with the XP calculated in every encounter - there is no need to stray from those numbers. If a group plays on a regular basis without a campaign goal in mind, there is no need to modify the existing XP structure. If a group tends to start and stop campaigns on once a month basis...ditto.
If, however, the group should decide on a duration of the campaign prior to the start of the campaign and the DM should calculate XP based on how many sessions the group will have to end at a certain point. A very simple example is thus: 1 year campaign ending at 12th level with once a month group play = enough XP per session to raise to the next level.
As ever,
ACE
I use the story award, similiar to yours(OP). I, too grew tired with the kill it to get xp system(and the xp being way too high for the challenge). XP awards are granted for completing objectives, not killing allies, and for role play(this last one being an individual award, the others are group).
This also allows me to determine the speed of advancement, based on the story, not the slaughter count.
While it has nothing really to do with your award points or the reasons why you may use them (I may try and steal your idea for my next sessions though!) the only "house rule" that I apply to my own games is the following:
For every natural 20 rolled the player gains 50 experience IF they can explain how their action was sufficiently excellent or outstanding.
I feel this encourages players to get involved. Even the fighters aren't just standing around waiting for the next encounter as they're busy crafting, making diplomacy rolls etc. Plus it gives an extra reason for players to make rolls for skill checks - even those they'd normally pass or ignore (due to their skill bonus being naturally higher than the DC for example).
Mike Mearls discussed a system where every gold coin a PC spends on wine, women (or men) and song translates into 10XP, and no XP from other sources. This was designed for Iron Heroes, where magic items effectively don't exist, but the idea is there.
It would be an interesting system in a world where there is no market for magic items, and they can't be passed about as currency. Money is for XP, items are for using. I'm considering such a system for my annual summer campaign.
Handing out XP depends entirely on the scope of the campaign or adventure that is being run. If the group is using a canned adventure, they are designed to progress with the XP calculated in every encounter - there is no need to stray from those numbers. If a group plays on a regular basis without a campaign goal in mind, there is no need to modify the existing XP structure. If a group tends to start and stop campaigns on once a month basis...ditto.
If, however, the group should decide on a duration of the campaign prior to the start of the campaign and the DM should calculate XP based on how many sessions the group will have to end at a certain point. A very simple example is thus: 1 year campaign ending at 12th level with once a month group play = enough XP per session to raise to the next level.
As ever,
ACE
1 think 1 level per month of play is way too much .... Look at Elminster : he's several thousand years old , lived tons and tons of adventures , became nearly equal to a god, and he's only level 25 or something !!!! How could normal PCs become level 12th in ONE YEAR OF PLAY ???
Look at Elminster : he's several thousand years old , lived tons and tons of adventures , became nearly equal to a god, and he's only level 25 or something !!!!
It's because he crafts magic items--that uses up his excess XP.
|
1 think 1 level per month of play is way too much .... Look at Elminster : he's several thousand years old , lived tons and tons of adventures , became nearly equal to a god, and he's only level 25 or something !!!! How could normal PCs become level 12th in ONE YEAR OF PLAY ???
I think he means I month real time, not game time. In the campaign I play in one month real time = sometimes a year or so and entails several small adventures.
FH
I think he means I month real time, not game time. In the campaign I play in one month real time = sometimes a year or so and entails several small adventures.FH
FH is spot on...sorry for the confusion. Also, like i said in my previous post, it depends on what level goals the group wants to hit at the onset of the campaign.
As ever,
ACE
No problem , pal.By the way , what do you readers think of my home system for XP ?
I have nothing to offer as substitue. I just want to say that I agree.
Experience should be rewarded if objectives are attained, not for killing a hippogriff on the way to the next village.
Hmmm...Ultradan
I get the rationale and in part I agree - but as the characters advance primarily what they get better at is fighting - using swords, spells, songs, whatever - but combat oriented stuff - the way people get better at fighting, in my experience (pun intended) is by fighting. Thus I think that rewarding fighting, regardless of the rationale or roleplay that leads to the fighting, with xp works with the logic of the game. Think about the reverse - why would a fighter become a better fighter or a spell caster a better caster by solving puzzles or developing relationships.
Don't get me wrong I like a heavy roleplaying game and think it is appropriate to award a bonus - but I think the current system works the way it should.
That said if your alternate system works for your group thats great.
I neither agree nor disagree;
The XP system is merely a mechanism for progressing your characters as they gain ability in their respective classes; it technically has nothing to do with "role-playing", since characters don't "role-play" - in the game world, they're real.
If the gaming group wants to focus on role-play over hack & slash, all the better, but how does a fighter become a better fighter by talking with, interacting with, or even bedding a local wench? How does a rogue become a stealthier scout or burglar by hanging out at the taverns all night?
Note, that a 1st level character of any class can role-play as well as a 25th level...to a true character roleplayer, class level is irrelevant - it's just an indication of relative power.
The game has gotten so focused on feats, classes, magic items and other "power-level indicators" that roleplay has become an afterthought...
To bring it back, just ignore what level your character is and play as if you didn't care; the best campaigns happen when the players stop looking at their "next level-up meter" and focus on the story, not which feat they're going to pick next.
*gets off soapbox*
M
|
Alternate XP Sytem <----- link
This method of XP awards has worked well for me since '89 when I didn't have to crank XP awards for monsters based on their hit point totals anymore. Oi.
...the best campaigns happen when the players stop looking at their "next level-up meter" and focus on the story, not which feat they're going to pick next.
I am in TOTAL agreement with that statement.
Ultradan
I like the idea of awarding 50xp for each natural 20 rolled, as long as that award was limited to only one natural 20 per type of roll per session, otherwise it could get out of hand as people try to "manufacture" die rolls for every opportunity possible.
Some really good ideas tossed around in this thread.....
Back in the days of 2nd edition, I used to give a lot of these small bonuses...
Like 10xp per spell level cast,
10 xp per HD of creature slain (giving the killing blow),
and other little xp bonuses ranging from 50 to 500 for good ideas / roleplaying / helping the game to move along.
I stopped doing that with 3rd Edition cause I figured that the players were already moving too fast up that experience ladder.
Ultradan
I stopped giving individual XP awards because of all the bickering it caused when someone thought they were being treated unfairly.
Director of Narrative
|
I give little bonuses between 50-200XP as a reward for good role-playing, creatively solving a problem, approaching a threat from a different angle, staying focused in the game etc.
When I give the players their experience I write down the base XP then write down any bonus XP they gained if any and quasi-point system of how I percieved their actions/interactions in regard to alignment/motivations. I write this all down on a little slip of paper and give it to them folded up.
I feel this helps everyone keep the pulse of what's going on and how they're developing.
One standard house rule regarding XPs is 25xp for each successful skill roll, generally in a non-combat situation. At the end of game, I award a base XP for each player, then an additional 500-1000 XP (or more) for good roleplaying. When I'm awarding the additional XP I also mention why I'm awarding the additional XP ("excellent idea at the bridge," "great interaction with the city council").
I was once involved in a campaign lasting 8 real world years that only saw us to about 10th level (2nd ed). It was a fantastic game. We really got to know what our characters could do, and we were always looking for ways we could use our abilities. Our characters developed well, and we had a lot of fun. Still, there were times we wished things moved a bit faster.
And we definitely go up fast in the new edition. A lot of what folks have said about barely getting used to the current set of abilities before you get yet more stuff really resonated with me. So I've decided to simply cut down the XP awards.
And I don't like XP awards for roleplay. I've roleplayed for many years online (MUSH, MUX, MUD, for those who know about such things), and often roleplay is the ONLY thing you get XP for (or whatever the system in question uses). And where does most of this RP happen? In bars. Parks. Shops. People's houses. And it's all social RP. And my reaction is typically this: "So, just /how/ does my witty conversation with Janet translate into me being a more powerful mage/better fighter?"
I look at D&D as a game of meeting and overcoming challenges. One becomes a better fighter by slinging his sword and learning from his battles. A mage increases his power through cunning use of his powers. Every trap, every sneaky situation teaches the rogue a little more about who and what he is.
So I personally like the XP for combat system. And I like dishing out XP for other challenges where cunning use of the character's abilities wins the day. And while roleplay /can/ be instrumental in achieving some goal and certainly enhances the experience, it's a talent that's external to the mechanics of the game. So I think rewarding it with XP would be about as fair as giving XP to someone just because the player is good looking.
My system as mentioned on the top was not intended to reward players only on their social abilities , but on completion of adventure goals with Adventure Points.
Let me give you an example :
Players have to rescue the daughter of a lord who was kidnapped by some thieves guild with the help of the councellor of the lord , a traitor. To find the place , they have to investigate and gather informations . Then , at the end of the dungeon , they have to kill the guardian and then they free the daughter.
If I envision this adventure , I will rewards adventurers this way :
-1 Pt for finding where the thieves guild HQ is
-1 Pt for revealing there was a traitor and exposing him
-1 Pt for destroying the guild and make their way in
-1 Pt to free the girl and complete the adventure
-1 Pt possible for nice action and good roleplaying
-1 Pt possible for completing personal action
So as you can see it's not based only on social things , but as well on combat and adventuring skills , and nice way to play your characters.....
I stopped giving individual XP awards because of all the bickering it caused when someone thought they were being treated unfairly.
I just don't want to be mean to Neophyte players or to more background style players - if you feel shy I'm not sure I want to use a game mechanic to tell you that you suck.
Also I occasionally have problems with lime light hogs - its not really out of control but I hardly want to encourage the behavior.
This discussion about how to award XP is ages old, just like the discussion about who is more powerful, the mage or the fighter. For both, there is no one true answer.
That said, I use the XP awards for 3e much like written - it works in the context of the game, but it does not produce good roleplaying. The solution with adventure points sounds good if you have charted out your story well in advance.
The main problem is the level-based advancement, IMO. If you fight enough critters, it is logical that your fighting skills get better,and your (offensive) spellcasting skills and maybe your resistances to poison or whatever,but other skills and abilities ? Hacking my way through hordes of, say, orcs, enables me to ride better ? Or play my instruments better ? Or gathering more knowledge ? Come on, not seriously.
A system considering this would not be D&D anymore, as D&D does not have this realistic approach. Changing 3e to accomodate this is probably more trouble than it is worth. I had for my games in AD&D2 adapted the chaosium skill system (from Cthulhu, Stormbringer and other RPGs), but in 3e the skills are bound into the game system in such way that this would be a lot of work - somewhere on this message boards it was written that the various subsystems of 3e are so tightly interwoven with each other that even minor changes can have repercussions for the system as a whole, and that makes changing anything very complicated. In AD&D2, the skill system was added as an afterthought anyway, so it would not break anything to replace it with something else. And the skills (and their improvements) were independent from fighting and spellcasting.
(If someone is not familiar with the Chaosium system: the skills are percentile-based, with some bonuses (boni?) from the attributes, and if you successfully use a skill, you can make a percentile roll to see if you improve that skill. If the percentile was higher than your current skill, you could improve it by 1d6 or 1d10. This system is simple, elegant and self-balancing - the better you are, the harder it is to get even better.)
Well, enough on that...
I reduced XP awards for my players as they advanced much too fast, and I don´t calculate awards too painstakingly. I gear the XPs towards the advancement speed I consider right. To date, it has worked that way quite well.
Stefan
We did away with XPs all together (which makes it much easier on the DM). At the end of an adventure (which usually runs 3 or 4 sessions, so it can be about a month of play real time), the DM simply awards levels according to the difficulty level of the game. In a game where the group really worked hard to achieve their goals and worked together as a team, each Char may get 2 levels. In a game that was only one or two sessions and not a big challenge, there likely wouldn't be any levels awarded. Players that miss sessions also miss out on getting the levels.
Yes, it's arbitrary, subjective, and doesn't give the players any wiggle room for argument. That's why it's so easy to use. :)
It's true that the current system doen't make a lot of sense when the charaters ability to climb a wall gets better every time he stabs a guy in the back, or a character can more easily identify that mysterious potion after blasting off a few fireballs.
However, I'm sure it was the hope of the creators of the game that those of you out there who create your own adventures would think to include some of those elements in addition to the hordes of slavering monstrosities listed in the MM.
Monte Cook recently talked in his Dungeoncraft articles about how only every OTHER encounter should be a combat scenario. Not only does this keep players(and DM's) from getting burned out on battle after battle, it gives DM's the opportunity to insert challenges that require those skills that seem to fade into the background at higher levels.
I personally don't have a problem with the current system. It does seem to take PC's up the ladder fairly quickly, but that could also be my own fault for throwing too many random encounters into my adventures. I think if I remove many of the random encounter situations I will be a bit happier with my players level progession.
To address Grisalame: Your system sounds very well thought out. I don't want to sound like I think it is a bad idea. I personally will stick with the current XP system because it cuts down on my prep time, something we all can agree is a good thing I think.
My two coppers - Rath
Thanks,
You know this sytem is not completely mine , it's an adaptation from the old Alternity System (that was also the ancestor to the D20 System) and I liked it a lot back in old days.....
And yes , I'm very glad about it , like my players are. I also put in shape a system for background Feats and Flaws , the last one being flaws very funny to roleplay (for example "Pathological Honesty" or my favorite one "Disbeliever of Magic") , if you want I could put some words about it as well....
I have several role playing party members right now. I try to give them a few extra XP points when I think they have highlighted a part of their character that cannot be expressed in combat. Example: One PC left the party in the big city to spend some of her money on buying food to pass out in a poor district. I had the district warden come up and thank her and gave out a small XP bonus. This (I hope) showed the player that things beyond just the quests set down in the adventures can help you advance your character.
The other thing I forgot to mention in my earlier post is that I like to let the players decide what they will do and where they will go to do it. This system of "freedom" makes it hard for me as a DM to plan ahead with set XP awards, since even I have only the vaguest idea what kind of situations the PC's will stumble upon. As they advance in levels ,I have set up several adventures that have "windows of opportunity".
As the players move through 4th -6th level for example, a "window will open" in which an NPC makes mention of a quest that they may have an interest in doing. If they decide to follow that path, great. If not, the "window" closes as they move past 6th level and another opens.
I should mention that my campaign has an over all quest where the players a exploring the depths of Rappan Athuk, an uber dungeon that has the potential to be the sole focus of a campaign.
Man,
You are mastering this ...thing ?? Well , as you can see , I'm not too fond of dungeons , or let's say huge ones . I like my dungeons to be small but very interesting and special .
But if I was using Rappan Athuk in my campaign , I think it would be worth 2 to 3 Adventure Points or even higher for completion of this monster....Why? Because once adventurers got rid of this , history has been written and it's a huge event , and it deserves a big amount of Adventure Points ! And of course if you put some secondary quests inside of it , each one is worth some Dv.Pts as well....
Contributor
|
I used to give bonus xp for certain players, but I found it caused more trouble than it was worth, and did nothing to encourage or discourage different behaviour. So I now give equal experience to all party members. The campaign I am in now is the Age of Worms AP, so we use the standard XP system. Basically, we want to be in synch with the expected challenge level.
For my Eberron campaign (currently on hold) I devised a new system. I use the standard points required but I award the points based on group performance according to this table:
Challenges
Strategy 50 75 100
Teamwork 50 75 100
Success 50 75 100
Role-play
Interaction 50 75 100
Sacrifice 50 75 100
Facing Challenges 50 75 100
Story
Problem Solving 50 75 100
Goal Resolution 50 75 100
Plot Development 50 75 100
Focus 50 75 100
Basically, every session I take a copy of my table and circle one of the point values for each category based on if the party's performance was satisfactiry, good, or outstanding. I often award no points in a category if it isn't applicable. For example, in a heavy combat session, the party may get no interaction points.
If anyone asks, I can give you better definitions of these categories. I just cut and paste the chart I made for my own use.
I look at the group as a whole, but in a balanced way. If a couple of players really put some effort into character interaction, I give a 'good' rating to the group. Basically at the end of the session, if I can think of two examples of something, they get a satisfactory, 4 examples gets a good and 6 gets an outstanding, although I give myself wiggle room.
I like this system because we discuss it in an open format at the end of each session, and everyone gets rewarded for anyone's good performance, but in the discussion, the individuals are recognized in a real manner. There's less competitiveness; people are honestly pleased when someone else did something well.
This system is also very simple, and it creates a slower experience curve because the rewards don't grow with the levels. This is good for my vision of Eberron. There aren't supposed to be a lot of high level characters. My players got to survivable level quickly but then slowed down. They really get why there aren't any Elminsters in this setting.
Let me suggest the system I have largely turned to, as have some other DMs I know: The living greyhawk setup.
Basically, the level of the adventure determines the availabel xp. At lvls 1 and 2, its 450 xp, at 3 and 4 its 675, so on. Each challenge of the adventure is a percentage of this total; this includes both RPing and Combat challenges. By completing each one, you get a piece of this larger xp total.
Even with fully successful adventures, it takes the third advenutre to get into level 2; this stretchses the game, making it take a few months to get into the 6-10 range, if you play often.
It has been my experience that gaining a level means a lot more, and the game is more meaningful. I enjoy the way that the game progresses, and I feel the progression being more of an achievment, not a foregone conclusion.
So now here's my system : I reward my players with Adventure Points instead of basic XP , that I converted like that : Level 2 is 5 Adv.Pts , Level 3 10 Adv.Pts ,etc.Each time the players attain a level , the Adv.Pts are erased and it starts again..For rules concerning XP , like some spells , just divide the gap of XP between each level by the number of Adv.Points. Typical reward for me is 1-4 points per adventure , 1-2 points per good to excellent roleplaying , and 1 point for general fun and success of the session .
After rereading your post, I would like to ask for some additional details and want to see if I understand your system.
So, basically, its 200 XP = 1 AP ?How do you figure out just what an adventure is "worth" in terms of AP ? Just guesstimating ? If I understand it right, your characters could rise from level one to level two within one session, if all runs perfect?
Are the roleplaying awards individual awards ?
The higher in level the characters are, the longer they need (in terms of adventures) to gain another level ?
PS : I think that all roleplaying games fanatics will recognize an inspiration from the Alternity XP system (I miss that game....). And they're right !!! ;))
I don´t know that system. Is there any online resource I can read more on it?
Stefan
I don't realy understand why anyone would want to change the XP to anything else than XP, but I do understand that you would want to give XP for something else than monsterbashing.
I use both the ordinary system when the characters run around killing things. It realy isn't that bad when a session turns out this way and I like a little action in my game once in a while.
Then again, sometimes my players just don't get in any fights. They just go along and get along with everyone. At these times I tend to shoot from the hip awarding them XP equaling about a quarter to half the XP needed to go from one level to the next.
Example: Going from level 1 to 2 requires 1000 XP, so an award given by me would be around 250 to 500 XP.
During exeptionally long sessions or when my characters do something extrodinary the XP can go above this. I do however try to never give them more XP than their level x1000.
Hi all,
To Stebehil : to determine what should be the reward of my players , I determine the major goals and objectives of the adventure , and I also use individual rewards (that I could transform in party rewards as well) for roleplaying and personal quests achieved...
Each adventure will have different level of goals , and also different level of difficulty . So in low levels , yeah progression will be fat , but as you erase all your adv.Pts when hitting a new level , and for example , you need something like 220 Adv.Pts to hit level 20 , it's a long way to go and I find it normal : it's difficult to progress while already a skilled guy and advanced specialist....Don't you think ?
Concerning Alternity , go on Google and you'll find some nice websites about this game , as well as fast-rules play downloadable for free...Hope you'll enjoy this great game that never had the chance it deserved....
PS : I use Adv.Pts because I hate calculating thousands of XP summed by 2220134436 plus 5645646442.10.......I hate calculating.....That's the main reason , and with my little Adv.Pts I'm fine ;)
Each adventure will have different level of goals , and also different level of difficulty . So in low levels , yeah progression will be fat , but as you erase all your adv.Pts when hitting a new level , and for example , you need something like 220 Adv.Pts to hit level 20 , it's a long way to go and I find it normal : it's difficult to progress while already a skilled guy and advanced specialist....Don't you think ?Concerning Alternity , go on Google and you'll find some nice websites about this game , as well as fast-rules play downloadable for free...Hope you'll enjoy this great game that never had the chance it deserved....
Thanks for elaborating, now it got clearer.
I didn´t want to question your idea of a slower progression, I just wanted to make sure I understand it. I´m on your side: If you are already very good at something, its harder to get even better. The progression in the present system is too fast for my tastes, too. I think I will give your ideas some thought and try them in my group.I´ll google for Alternity shortly and see whats there.
Thank you,
Stefan
Could you please give me your feedback if you use my system ? I'm interested to see if it's universal or if it works only within my group.
Thanks a lot
The PCs in my first 3.5 campaign ever are nearing 12th level. We've been playing biweekly for about a year now. My last 2nd ed. campaign took 4 years to get them to that level, but I digress...
For my next campaign, I'm going to make my players plot their level advancement progression at least 2 levels ahead of time. This will ensure some "realism" as the PCs are working on developing their newly emerging skills in between adventures, during down time, etc.
I'm going to cut combat XP awards to 75% of their current level. I'm going to award 100xp per gaming session for any player who keeps a character log. Since I suck at being fair about awarding discretionary XP, I'm going to adopt Neeklus' idea from this thread and award XP per natural 20 rolled. However, if I believe the player tried to artificially manufacture a situation where he had to make a lot of d20 rolls to increase the odds of rolling a natural 20, then they will get the award only once for that situation. I'm thinking of making skill roll natural 20's worth 50xp and combat natural 20's worth 25xp.
I wish I could say that I could award discretionary XP awards to individual players fairly, but when it comes to giving out XP, my players have an incredible memory of who got what and who should have gotten what at what time, so if I do that, it'll just cause animosity towards me, because one of them is going to recall a situation where I gave player X more XP than player Y for the same situation.
Well, I wholeheartedly agree that the best game is when people stop looking at the numbers on their sheet and just act as if they were real people in a real world, and I deffinately reward such action (HINT HINT to my players on the boards!).
However, I agree that the XP system as is makes sense. Characters typically spend a disproportianate amount of their abilities on combat (not a bad thing, just an observation), and thus rewarding them for honing those abilities by giving XP based on use (meaning combat) makes perfect sense to me. That stated, if you decided to play a game with very little emphasis on combat and a huge amount of court intrigue, then yes, the XP system would need major overhauling for your game.
Though I've never played an older edition or another tabletop RPG, I too feel sometimes that the XP system moves too fast. However, I've tinkered with changing it and have met with no appreciated success. I've got a group of powergamers (which is just fine), so leveling up is a big aspect of the game for them, and slowing that progression really rubs them the wrong way. So I don't mess with it.
To add something creative to this thread, I do reward good roleplaying in minor but noticeable ways (or try to remember to do so, at least), and I also give XP for the creation of non-magical items using craft skills, generally equal to the GP of the item. This helps explain how typical smiths in the world level up. I also give XP for spell creation, typically equal to 100 XP per spell level. I have a system governing this, as well (it treats Spellcraft somewhat like a Craft skill), and it takes quite a bit of time, so it is rarely invoked and thus doesn't unbalance the game. It serves as an in game method for explaining how a wizard who just sits in his tower or college studying can gain in power too, so that every wizard doesn't have to be out "adventuring" (a concept that really rubs me the wrong way).
Hope that little input justifies the length of the post! :)
well , I think XP awarding and the way it works depends heavily of course of the players you have . Myself , I had a party of real powergamers , but who at the same time liked humor and theater-like situations , and finally after some years together they grew tired of monster bashing and wanted new challenges , and new ways of considering power....
So that's why I put this system in shape , I think that I were playing with 100% typical munchkin players and monster killers , they wouldn't find any interest in it.....It's a system that can please to roleplayers and more varied kind of players , who like fighting , but not fighting for fighting....