Split. An encounter is worth a set amount of xp. So more players will get a smaller chunk each since it was easier for them than fewer players.
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All XP awards earned in Pathfinder adventures should be split evenly among the party.
We've experimented once with individual awards at the start of Skull & Shackles, and in that case we specifically said "these awards should not be split up."
In all other cases, the assumption is that all XP earned in a Paizo published adventure is split evenly among the characters.
I wonder, given how APs are designed to have the PCs level up at certain points, are there any groups out there that do away with XP altogether, with the GM simply stating at certain key accomplishment, "Ding-ding-ding! You level up!"? How is that working for you if you do?
I'm tentatively set to start Skull & Shackles in just under a month and am considering this. But I would like to hear the horror stories (and success stories) with this approach before I commit.
Thanks in advance for your feedback. :-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder, given how APs are designed to have the PCs level up at certain points, are there any groups out there that do away with XP altogether, with the GM simply stating at certain key accomplishment, "Ding-ding-ding! You level up!"? How is that working for you if you do?
I'm tentatively set to start Skull & Shackles in just under a month and am considering this. But I would like to hear the horror stories (and success stories) with this approach before I commit.
Thanks in advance for your feedback. :-)
I've done it before, and a lot of people do it. Concerning APs, as long as your party is the right size, I don't see how it could possibly be a problem. I don't like doing it anymore because it doesn't seem to give the same sense of accomplishment as seeing that xp number grow.
|
Creative Director
|
I wonder, given how APs are designed to have the PCs level up at certain points, are there any groups out there that do away with XP altogether, with the GM simply stating at certain key accomplishment, "Ding-ding-ding! You level up!"? How is that working for you if you do?
I'm tentatively set to start Skull & Shackles in just under a month and am considering this. But I would like to hear the horror stories (and success stories) with this approach before I commit.
Thanks in advance for your feedback. :-)
That's absolutely an option, and that's why we list the points at which we expect characters to level up in the adventure on the first page.
I've played in this type of game before, though, and didn't like it. As a player, the concreteness of gaining a number that I can add to an existing number as physical proof that I progressed on my path toward the next level by playing a session is really important, and it helps me gauge how fast I'm leveling up and prepares me (and lets me anticipate) when a session is likely to give me xp enough to level up.
The game as written bundles your character increases at fixed points (the 20 level increases), and handing out actual XP points are a nice way to give players a tiny bit of increase after every session.
As a GM, at the very least, taking the time to add up XP is a good point for the players to help start cleaning the table up.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder, given how APs are designed to have the PCs level up at certain points, are there any groups out there that do away with XP altogether, with the GM simply stating at certain key accomplishment, "Ding-ding-ding! You level up!"? How is that working for you if you do?
Lots of GMs do this, and I prefer it as a player since I don't have to worry about if I forgot to write down some XP or if I screwed up the math somewhere along the way.
Also, you don't end up with dumb situations where the PCs are 60 xp away from reaching a level, which encourages them to go out and pick fights with farm animals, etc. :-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder, given how APs are designed to have the PCs level up at certain points, are there any groups out there that do away with XP altogether, with the GM simply stating at certain key accomplishment, "Ding-ding-ding! You level up!"? How is that working for you if you do?
My last game I started with me handing out XP at the end of every session. Eventually my players said: "hey, why don't you just tell us when we level?" so we switched to that. It worked great.
I've played in this type of game before, though, and didn't like it. As a player, the concreteness of gaining a number that I can add to an existing number as physical proof that I progressed on my path toward the next level by playing a session is really important, and it helps me gauge how fast I'm leveling up and prepares me (and lets me anticipate) when a session is likely to give me xp enough to level up.
Of course, not everyone likes that system. So I suggest you ask your group which way they prefer. The game works fine either way.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder, given how APs are designed to have the PCs level up at certain points, are there any groups out there that do away with XP altogether, with the GM simply stating at certain key accomplishment, "Ding-ding-ding! You level up!"? How is that working for you if you do?
I'm tentatively set to start Skull & Shackles in just under a month and am considering this. But I would like to hear the horror stories (and success stories) with this approach before I commit.
Thanks in advance for your feedback. :-)
I've come to prefer experience points, personally. Having said that, we havent used them for the last twenty years or so and it's definitely been quicker and more convenient in a story sense (no more delaying fighting the big boss until we've earnt another couple of hundred experience points).
.Including experience points does lead to some weird metagame things - however you assign them will skew your players actions towards those things you tend to favor. That can be a good tool if you want to reward different styles of play, but can lead to some incongruous player choices, in my experience.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder, given how APs are designed to have the PCs level up at certain points, are there any groups out there that do away with XP altogether, with the GM simply stating at certain key accomplishment, "Ding-ding-ding! You level up!"? How is that working for you if you do?
I'm tentatively set to start Skull & Shackles in just under a month and am considering this. But I would like to hear the horror stories (and success stories) with this approach before I commit.
Thanks in advance for your feedback. :-)
I actually split the difference between the two methods.
I calculate XP and distribute them accordingly, tracking them on a Google Docs spreadsheet that's shared with all of the players. That way, they all get the sense of accomplishment that other posters (including His Most Excellent T-Rex himself) have mentioned.
If the PCs aren't at the correct level before the next part of the AP, I'll either run a homebrew encounter or two (if there's time both in-game and OOG), or just grant a "story award" that brings them to the right level.
Just my 2 cp.
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Another reason why I prefer using actual XP points is that at the end of a session, I always add the totals up on the battlemat with a marker in front of everyone, and I call out the awards to everyone. Not only does this let them see what monster fights got them more XP, but more importantly, it shows them that when they do roleplaying encounters or otherwise solve situations and encounters in the game without battle, or when they spend 3 hours not fighting at all but interacting with people, or when they achieve important story goals, they get an equal if not greater amount of XP than they do just fighting. It helps to reinforce the feeling that time spent just talking to NPCs isn't "wasted" time... that it actually helps them get better.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I actually have the opposite opinion Mr. James in regards to XP.
A few years ago I switched away from handing out XP and I noticed that the gameplay sped up and the players got more involved in the story. They knew that they could play their characters how they liked and approach the story how they liked and not worry about slogging through combats to earn rewards. This was in 3.5 but the logic still holds true now.
I ran Shackled City like that and it worked great the whole way through. To each their own but since I am a more story focused GM I was very glad I eschewed XP.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am playing in a Kingmaker campaign at the moment without xp awards and I find it quite frustrating. Definitely prefer the sense of achievement as mentioned above.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think there's something to be said for both systems. The last big campaign I ran, I dispensed with XP and simply leveled people up at appropriate points. I had a special reason at the time, however. I was running the campaign for a group of 9 players, but I confined them to 6 active characters at a time. (Any extras on hand were given mapping or note-taking duties, or just hung out and enjoyed the game, which they were fine with.) On the one hand, this made it relatively easy to get a game together; even if one or two players couldn't make it, there was almost always enough players on hand to forge ahead. But it also made XP awards problematic, since inevitably some players were around for more encounters than others. And when some players disappeared for months to study abroad or whatever, tracking xp would have put them way behind. Leveling up at set spots kept everyone in the game on the same terms. I also agree that dispensing with XP can be freeing in terms of game-style; if the thing that gets you a new level is progressing to a set point in the plot, the specific means to get there become less important.
On the other hand, I had to develop a new system for handling magic item creation and powerful spells like wish with an XP component. Since I was using fate points in my game, I developed an algorithm to let players convert fate points into XP for the purpose of crafting or spell-casting, and that seemed to work pretty well. (They *treasured* their precious fate points, so surrendering one to write some scrolls made them hesitate, just like XP costs should.) But it did add a layer of complexity to the game.
Also, there is something primally satisfying to watching an XP total grow. I don't want to deny that. That's why in the next campaign I'm running, where I expect to have a more traditional group of players that all meet with about the same relative frequency, I intend to track XP. (Plus, moving from 3.5 to PF, it's easier to track XP in the new system.) I can always switch back to the story-based system if it turns out to be a problem.
Excellent! Thanks everyone for your feedback! :-D Good idea to simply take it up with the players; I'll do that.
Personally, as a player, in PF or D&D in general, xp were meaningless to me unless it was the batch of xp that meant a level up. As a DM, xp used to be such an exercise to tally and divide (an exercised I used to cherish). 3.0 evolved that task to simplify it nicely. I've just started playing a campaign in which the GM does not bother with xp and I'm completely fine with that.
I have ran campaigns where a player would don CE alignment when close to leveling up so they could kill pets, commoners, what-have-you, in order to level up. Cheese.
But good call to let the players decide. I'll definitely bring it up as an option. Thanks again! :-D (Edit: sp)