I'm the GM for a group of three players. We're playing Carrion Crown. We're experienced roleplayers, but since it's our first time playing Pathfinder, we want to stick closely to the rules as they are, to get a feel for it all before we might try any houserules.
We're still in the first volume of CC, the three PCs are level 2. I threw in some extra combat encounters (for them to get accustomed to Pathinder combat rules, and for some extra XP). I run a DMPC because I thought they'd really need a cleric and simply could use a little help overall. So far, I've been counting the DMPC, dividing the XP by 4, and having her advance at the same rate as the PCs.
Now we might get some new players. One or two who will probably only be able to play with us for some weeks, and one who will be around longer, but will probably only be able to attend 50% of the time. I'll retire the DMPC, but I'm still not sure how to handle the situation XP-wise. I guess while we have the two extras, I'll just increase the challenges a bit during their stay, and it'll work out fine dividing the XP among the five or six of them. What about the one who'll only make it 50% of the time though? Should I always simply divide the XP by number of players (or characters) attending the session in question? I don't want him to suffer XP-wise, so that he's not eventually much weaker than the others, but I'm worried about imbalance, if one week they get a lot of XP split among three characters, and the next there are four of them and they're more powerful than they would have been if they had always been four, if you know what I mean. I also would prefer not to constantly have to adjust enemy strength. I'm sure we're not the only group in a situation like this, how do others handle it?
|
I find that level checkpoints and such are all well and good for APs and for linear stories. but for sandbox style adventures you can do what i do and still divide the XP by the number of players in attendance and then for the ones that missed give them about 75-90% of the amount of XP that the rest of the of the group got and maybe a bit of swag he brought from his previous "Dispatch" quest. and have dont plan out where every monster is in the dungeon make it to where there are encounter areas and have multiple encounters set up for each area.
The AP should have level up points usually marked on the first page onf the adventure chapter. Forget XP and just let players level up at those points.
Like I said, we'd prefer not to houserule for now, so I'm looking for a different solution.
Besides, this approach feels rather railroady to me - in Haunting of Harrowstone, the PCs can start exploring the prison at any time, but if you don't let them hit lvl 2 until you think they should, that takes away their already limited freedom. Having them level almost instantly if they go there doesn't feel right either.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
The problem you are going to have is the every other week player is going to fall behind quickly unless you have some way of bumping his experience artificially.
If precision is important to you then the best way to approach it would be to give out experience after every session. My wife made a spreadsheet with all the encounters on it and it's fairly easy to tally it up quickly if you set things up right in advance. Otherwise it doesn't take too long with a pocket calculator, just writing down the experience for each encounter as they hit it and then take a total and divide by player count each week.
My group always keeps the entire party at the same xp total regardless of whether or not someone is missing from the session or not. The encounters are scaled/designed for who is going to be there that day and the xp is split between them, but it adds to whatever the party level is at that moment. So lets say the party has 6 players at level 4. For argument sake we are using the medium xp track and they are at 11,000 xp.
If at a session only 4 players are there. The encounters are examined by the dm (in case he scaled them up expecting 6) and then the session is run. If the party overcomes 2 CR 4 encounters and 1 CR 5 thats 4,000xp earned. That divided by the number of players present is 1,000xp each. That means EVERYONES xp total is now 12,000xp. At the next session players 5 and 6 arrive and they are told they are at 12,000xp instead of the previously recorded 11,000. If there is a level up, the gm will usually inform people ahead of the game so they can be ready for it.
I play with a sumwhat larger group 7 ish players, and when someone isn't around we just npc his character with another player taking double duty. So long as it is a reasonable absence (and it sounds like you have understanding) xp is given to all players.
Skip eps entirely. Level the entire party when appropriate. As Kolokotroni sez.
Good work on dropping the DMPC!
One of my DMs runs adventure paths and levels us up when it says to -- I think his replacement in that group is planning the same thing. This works well, although it does lead to "why are we fighting this?" syndrome.
Other DMs I play with are fond of XP, which does lead to problems for people who can't make games. (I once spent an entire campaign 4-6 levels behind everybody else, and this was back in the 3.5 XP system where it was somewhat possible to catch up, so that might color my opinion that missing out on playing is punishment enough for absence.)
One of my DMs allows players to write an adventure journal to earn "extra credit" of 10% of the difference in levels xp, for party-level PCs, more for lower leveled ones. This also allows missing players to keep up with the story, if they have the time to read the journal. I'm not sure it would work for someone gone fully half the time, though, and if they're missing because they're generally busy they're not going to have the time anyway.
I'd give lower-level characters a bonus percent to their XP based on how many levels behind they were -- they're (hopefully) doing more with less, and therefore deserve more of a reward. I'd also consider allowing them HP and base saves as if they were party level for survivability, but no other class benefits -- although that could be too complex, especially for multiclassed characters.
I really hate having another player run a missing player's character -- at best, it's confusing because they're not familiar with the build, and occasionally the PCs die.
I play with a sumwhat larger group 7 ish players, and when someone isn't around we just npc his character with another player taking double duty. So long as it is a reasonable absence (and it sounds like you have understanding) xp is given to all players.
That's how I normally handle cases like this too. But so far I've always been fortunate when it comes to attendance rates. If the player can't make it 50% of the time, I wouldn't be comfortable having the character around all the time. "What did I miss?" - "You died." isn't fun, but quite likely with 50%.
I once spent an entire campaign 4-6 levels behind everybody else
Doesn't sound like fun either. And my players are very considerate of each other, they wouldn't want it either.
I use level checkpoints and use the Hero Point system as awards for players
One of my DMs allows players to write an adventure journal to earn "extra credit" of 10% of the difference in levels xp, for party-level PCs, more for lower leveled ones.
We're only using the CRB, but I borrowed hero points out of the APG already to be able to give special rewards for remarkable contributions like yes, the journal. I'm considering keeping everyone at (almost) the same XP, and let hero points be the mark of how often they participate and how much they contribute when they do.
This kinda ties in with the question how to handle a character's death, which I haven't decided yet either. Whether there's a XP or level penalty for the new character. It's how I used to handle it, but I'm used to running sandbox games, or a series of modules not as closely connected as an adventure path, where it didn't matter as much. With the path, I feel like the characters absolutely have to be a certain level (+/-1) at certain points, and I have to adjust to that. And I don't trust my Pathfinder-Fu enough yet to think I can easily adjust encounters to scale with party size/strength. The subtleties of the difference between slapping a template on the single big enemy, and surrounding him by minions.
How I do exp, for AP's at least, is I take the exp that each player in a four man party would get from an encounter, then I multiply that by the number of players, and thats my exp budget for the encounter. It usually means that you have to add in some extra monsters, but it gets the job done. If you couldnt get the exp total to divide between any combination of CR's, then I just round it.
I like that.
Well, thanks for the replies, everyone! I'll think it through some more and talk it over with my players, and we'll figure something out. And I'm hoping that one player was just describing a worst case scenario and he'll actually be able to make it much more often.
My group always keeps the entire party at the same xp total regardless of whether or not someone is missing from the session or not. The encounters are scaled/designed for who is going to be there that day and the xp is split between them, but it adds to whatever the party level is at that moment. So lets say the party has 6 players at level 4. For argument sake we are using the medium xp track and they are at 11,000 xp.
If at a session only 4 players are there. The encounters are examined by the dm (in case he scaled them up expecting 6) and then the session is run. If the party overcomes 2 CR 4 encounters and 1 CR 5 thats 4,000xp earned. That divided by the number of players present is 1,000xp each. That means EVERYONES xp total is now 12,000xp. At the next session players 5 and 6 arrive and they are told they are at 12,000xp instead of the previously recorded 11,000. If there is a level up, the gm will usually inform people ahead of the game so they can be ready for it.
This is pretty much exactly what my group does as well. It keeps everyone on an equal level without a lot of extra bookkeeping. It also eliminates the temptation to cheat and pad how much exp the player has because there are always 2-3 to check the total against. Furthermore it eliminates the problem of players who lose their character sheets and forget their total exp. I had a player in a prior campaign who was present every week and always got full exp. In spite of this he had the lowest total in the party because he regularly lost his character sheet and had to guess on the total. By keeping everyone at the same exp that problem has been eliminated.
I have group 5 folks 1 GM and 5 PC that show up 80% time, plus 2 more that show up 50% time, and 1 that shows up 25% time.
I always divide by the number folks that are there.
I give out +10% exp to Treasure tracker, Intitave tracker, Campain note tracker/ maper. These jobs are give out to who ever has lowest exp total that day. I will let have more that one job in a night so you could get as much as +30%.
If a PC falls behind as much as 3 levels then raise them up to 1 lower than average party level at the mid point of that level.
Being 1 levels behind not even a deal.
Being 2 levels behind is deal. but with what group size could be as much as 8 I let it go.
Being 3 levels behind is no fun that why kick you up.
Divide the XP amongst every players present in a given session, by also give that same amount of XP to the absent players. In that way, all PCs will be at the same level.
|
The AP should have level up points usually marked on the first page onf the adventure chapter. Forget XP and just let players level up at those points.Like I said, we'd prefer not to houserule for now, so I'm looking for a different solution.
Besides, this approach feels rather railroady to me - in Haunting of Harrowstone, the PCs can start exploring the prison at any time, but if you don't let them hit lvl 2 until you think they should, that takes away their already limited freedom. Having them level almost instantly if they go there doesn't feel right either.
Thats a strange way of looking at it. Of course I haven't used XP in so long I have no idea what a game with it even looks like anymore. My players however know I dont pull punches and if they wander in to something they are not ready for they have no problem retreating to come up with a new strategy. So using the advancement track works out.
Since you are intent on following the rules for now, I have a few things to say about the AP as written that I will include in a spoiler here for you.
The splatterman is a total TPK fest. The module recommends taking a dive and playing the splatterman like an idiot. I did this just to keep from killing all my players. Even though it was a tough fight and the Magus died, they were disappointed that I played him as written. Just a heads up.
There is plenty of disscussion in the Carrion Crown forum section. I found many threads to be very useful especially the Adivion Addrissant (sp?)thread and the soundtrack one. Good luck with your AP!
Thats a strange way of looking at it. Of course I haven't used XP in so long I have no idea what a game with it even looks like anymore. My players however know I dont pull punches and if they wander in to something they are not ready for they have no problem retreating to come up with a new strategy. So using the advancement track works out.
This might deserve its own thread. I guess simply following the advancement track works fine in a more linear module (one where you're on the railroad anyway). But I found HoH's
too vague to consider it. Apparently it is assumed the party engages in at least some encounters in the village first. But it doesn't matter in how many, and how well they do. A group who ignores most of the happenings in the village, or handles them poorly, will in terms of XP/levels, get just the same rewards as one who took a great interest in them and managed them perfectly. XP-wise, it makes no difference
and I believe it should, beyond
The way it is written, there's not even a difference between these two groups and one who ignores the village completely. And if for that group you don't let them advance to 2nd level at the suggested time because you feel they should do village encounters first, you are limiting their freedom. I don't like it and I think it's suicidal to bypass the village, but if the group wants to and manages to overcome the in this case not later challenges regardless, they should be rewarded.
Likewise, it feels strange to me to advance a group to lvl 4 the end of the module no matter how well or badly they did. And since they're leaving the area, there's not even much point to a group that did badly suffering terrible NPC reactions. To me it feels like the PCs' actions become meaningless. Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but for me XPs and level advancement are rewards and marks of how well you've done. You don't get them for free, just like you don't just get the treasure if you haven't actually found it.
I'm willing to try your method at a later time though. But like I said, we tried to keep the house rules to a minimum for now.
As for your spoiler,
I am worried about the Splatterman and the Lopper. That's why I very reluctantly introduced the DMPC cleric. I didn't think a group of three (TWF ranger, sword-and-shield paladin using the shield for defense, druid) who have zero experience playing Pathfinder and aren't particularly optimized, would stand a chance otherwise. I mean, they are still learning about some kinds of weapons not working too well against skeletons and zombies. Now with the new players the DMPC will be gone, but the danger is still there.