it bothers me as a DM, that players think, because the NPC monster is using their treasure, that they should be entitled to Extra XP, or that monsters should adhere to their wealth guidelines.
if the monsters has a lot of Extra Wealth, i don't think that honestly should justify a bit of additional XP, even a little. here is my reason why.
even if you include a monster with wealth of a PC 1 or 2 levels higher, while the wealth does add to the monster's power. the fact is, if you managed to defeat the mildly overequipped monster, you can freely loot the slain creature's possessions, and the excess wealth of the monster, is the bonus reward for beating it.
it's a philosophy practiced in a lot of other Non-D20 RPGs i have experienced.
it also opens up such concepts as lower level Nobility who bear a great amount of wealth, or high level transients dealing with poverty.
eventually, it will balance itself
sometimes, that weapon goes just a small percentage above the monster's treasure, i liked Alvena Publishing's Article on looting monsters.
but i like to take it a step further.
i don't intend to exploit consumables to cheat wealth, but i want more freedom in equipping my monsters without having to worry about whether or not it is truly worth additional experience.
i don't equip 1st level characters with +5 superweapons, but i do, like to equip a level 9 NPC Enemy Colonel with the +3 equivalent weapon the 7th level fighter PC seeks to Acquire. or even that plot relevant level 5 NPC Countess with +1 agile weapon and a few other miscellaneous goods that the PCs have a chance to acquire by doing favors for her
truth is, i don't want a tiny little chart to tell me how much gear an NPC of a certain level should possess, even if an NPC of their social status might possess more.
do any of you wish you had this level of freedom? within reason of course.
i'd rather we have a series of guidelines and recommended equipment based on level, than the wealth by level chart as written.
By the book, XP is rewarded based on CR. If you think the extra gear you gave the creature is enough to increase it's CR, then you should increase the XP accordingly. Otherwise, there's really no reason to grant more XP, based on equipment. As you said, the loot is it's own reward.
As I recall, an NPC geared with PC wealth would have a +1 CR, and would therefore grant more XP. Based on that, you can try to determine the CR of enemies based on how much extra gear you give them, and grant XP accordingly.
Building on sk8r's advice, keep in mind that wealth is balanced such that the players have the right amount of gear for their level. Too much, the combats get easier and easier (like the time one of my group's Paladins nearly one-shotted an Adult Green Dragon).
By the book, XP is rewarded based on CR. If you think the extra gear you gave the creature is enough to increase it's CR, then you should increase the XP accordingly. Otherwise, there's really no reason to grant more XP, based on equipment. As you said, the loot is it's own reward.
As I recall, an NPC geared with PC wealth would have a +1 CR, and would therefore grant more XP. Based on that, you can try to determine the CR of enemies based on how much extra gear you give them, and grant XP accordingly.
but in my own opinion, the loot is plenty of a reward on it's own
in fact, i'd rate a more minmaxed Character worth more XP than i would rate a Wealthier character
Character is Wealthier? no Extra XP, loot is the reward
Character is better optimized? a bit more XP because the character is actually stronger, based on the character's power.
even if you include a monster with wealth of a PC 1 or 2 levels higher, while the wealth does add to the monster's power. the fact is, if you managed to defeat the mildly overequipped monster, you can freely loot the slain creature's possessions, and the excess wealth of the monster, is the bonus reward for beating it.
In a very real sense, I agree. While I don't generally believe in overloading a monster with loot of any sort, I do think that in most cases a bit of extra loot is worth a bit more challenge.
sometimes, that weapon goes just a small percentage above the monster's treasure, i liked Alvena Publishing's Article on looting monsters.
Thank you. :)
but i like to take it a step further.
i don't intend to exploit consumables to cheat wealth, but i want more freedom in equipping my monsters without having to worry about whether or not it is truly worth additional experience.
i don't equip 1st level characters with +5 superweapons, but i do, like to equip a level 9 NPC Enemy Colonel with the +3 equivalent weapon the 7th level fighter PC seeks to Acquire. or even that plot relevant level 5 NPC Countess with +1 agile weapon and a few other miscellaneous goods that the PCs have a chance to acquire by doing favors for her
Well the core rules equate PC-levels of wealth to be +1 CR. Sometimes you'll just have to ad-hoc it in some cases. But if it makes you feel better, the 3.x DMG agreed with you to a point. It gave an example of a magic sword being used by gnolls merely because it was there to be used (specifically, if the PCs were going to fight gnolls with a chest with a magic sword inside, then by all accounts one of the gnolls should be wielding said sword instead of a mundane weapon).
truth is, i don't want a tiny little chart to tell me how much gear an NPC of a certain level should possess, even if an NPC of their social status might possess more.
do any of you wish you had this level of freedom? within reason of course.
There are some situations where you may need to ad-hoc stuff based on your world, its norms, and so forth. In another article on my blog I discussed that a landlord can acquire pretty large quantities of gold, which means that nobles or the wealthy might indeed have access to some of the finer things. If you're going into PC-wealth levels, I'd recommend using the +1 CR. If you're going more extreme, then you may need to make some situational adjustments (such as a young noble inheriting their father or mother's armaments, even if they really aren't very powerful or skilled themselves).
Now, due to the way that money works in this game, it's entirely possible to use a feast and famine method from time to time. If the party becomes overly wealthy for some reason, it's fine for them to go without a big score for a while. One example was a campaign I once opened with the party having been hired for a simple caravan escort mission, and the campaign introduction closed with an avalanche taking out the caravan and its members, with the party crawling out of the wreckage. They were level 1, but they gathered anything valuable that would help them get back to civilization, including an adamantine longsword, a suit of masterwork armor, a few cases of potions and oils, and anything else that seemed at all handy and not-nailed down.
Then for the next several sessions they basically made their way back to civilization as unknown assailants were trying to kill them (and later they were accused of being responsible for the caravan incident), with pretty much no loot to show for it. By the time they had reached civilization, their wealth was pretty close to spot-on (though they had begun drastically over-WBL).
Nine out of ten times, I'd actually er more on the side of over-WBL than under. Being under-equipped with usually run more risk of failure than being over-equipped will make things overly easy (a crude example is that a +3 weapon isn't much of an upgrade over a +2 weapon unless DR is involved).
i'd rather we have a series of guidelines and recommended equipment based on level, than the wealth by level chart as written.
I think we'd end up with similar complaints. See, games can often call for different needs. The WBL charts are essentially the average GP values of treasure gained at the rate that CR-equivalent encounters would cause you to level, with a bit shaved off in what would have been consumed consumable funds. In essence, literally the projected wealth that you would have gained over this amount of time (or perhaps in reverse given the XP-speed adjustments). At the end of the day, some people feel constrained because there is a standard, but the standard is a good place for people to practice and get comfortable with before they try to explore new territory.
Some campaigns can run pretty well without adhering to WBL. Campaigns like mine where you're often dealing with many low-CR creatures composing your higher CR encounters (an encounter with a pair of wyverns is CR 8, while a flight of wyverns between 3-6 can be a CR 9-11) could probably have successful PCs on lower than average WBL. However, my campaigns vary in their antagonists, and I wouldn't recommend PCs ever take on the big players like Pit Fiends without full investment of WBL or better if they wanted to make it out alive.
Personally I would give more experience for an encounter with particularly well-equipped enemies. But I would also give less for a fight against under-equipped enemies. Put simply, the former is harder, and the latter easier, to overcome and the experience should adjust accordingly.
|
I like to tightly control the gear to which my PCs have access. I don't like to let them get equipped to the max. If I need to make an opponent more challenging, I'll increase class levels/CR before I add better equipment.
Also, I ditched XP a long time ago. I level them according to the story now.
-Skeld
Personally I would give more experience for an encounter with particularly well-equipped enemies. But I would also give less for a fight against under-equipped enemies. Put simply, the former is harder, and the latter easier, to overcome and the experience should adjust accordingly.
but experience isn't the sole reward for the challenge
on an overequipped foe, the extra equipment is a reward all it's own for defeating them
and on disabling a trap, the trap is usually a reward for disabling it
i don't get too drastically excessive
but i prefer to adhoc, than spend hours building somebody
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like to tightly control the gear to which my PCs have access. I don't like to let them get equipped to the max. If I need to make an opponent more challenging, I'll increase class levels/CR before I add better equipment.
Also, I ditched XP a long time ago. I level them according to the story now.
-Skeld
I think that Umbriere is thinking more along the lines of special encounters or special NPCs (such as nobles who really aren't that strong or experienced but are well equipped due to their wealth).
In many cases, it's at this point where you just have to make a judgment as a GM. Now I personally don't like using a lot of treasure on NPCs for most any reason. I usually feel what they get is more than enough for most purposes, and even my wealthy nobles aren't going to have a lot of treasure that would be suitable for adventuring purposes (having lots of art objects like statues, paintings, and so forth is a different matter); but it could vary from campaign to campaign.
I too, like you, prefer other methods of power over equipment. NPC levels are one of my favorite methods of rounding out creatures if I want them to be tougher. I'm currently putting together a booklet of NPCs for my current campaign, and already have NPCs ranging from CR 1/8th (commoners with ad-hoc penalties to CR) to CR 6 super soldiers with CR 6 magical mounts (who are towards the upper end of power as far as individuals in my campaign are concerned). The most powerful magic items are possessed by the CR 6 soldiers (who have 13HD), and that's pretty much summed up as +1 full plate and +1 cloak of resistance.
I like to tightly control the gear to which my PCs have access. I don't like to let them get equipped to the max. If I need to make an opponent more challenging, I'll increase class levels/CR before I add better equipment.
Also, I ditched XP a long time ago. I level them according to the story now.
-Skeld
I think that Umbriere is thinking more along the lines of special encounters or special NPCs (such as nobles who really aren't that strong or experienced but are well equipped due to their wealth).
In many cases, it's at this point where you just have to make a judgment as a GM. Now I personally don't like using a lot of treasure on NPCs for most any reason. I usually feel what they get is more than enough for most purposes, and even my wealthy nobles aren't going to have a lot of treasure that would be suitable for adventuring purposes (having lots of art objects like statues, paintings, and so forth is a different matter); but it could vary from campaign to campaign.
I too, like you, prefer other methods of power over equipment. NPC levels are one of my favorite methods of rounding out creatures if I want them to be tougher. I'm currently putting together a booklet of NPCs for my current campaign, and already have NPCs ranging from CR 1/8th (commoners with ad-hoc penalties to CR) to CR 6 super soldiers with CR 6 magical mounts (who are towards the upper end of power as far as individuals in my campaign are concerned). The most powerful magic items are possessed by the CR 6 soldiers (who have 13HD), and that's pretty much summed up as +1 full plate and +1 cloak of resistance.
you understand me very well, special encounters or special NPCs. for other encounters, i generally use stuff like class levels or templates.
it's not the random orc that gets the magic weapon, it's more like that one elven countess who may have a magic dagger she inherited from her more powerful and more experienced uncle she may be willing to part with in exchange for a handful of favors in her county, or that gnoll chieftan who may have a shocking glaive he found in the abandoned horde of a deceased dragon.
i still try to keep it reasonable
The missing point is one other. By ginving loot but not exp you are creating PC with few levels but lots of equip, witch screws CR at least as much as giving very few coins. Thus, exp and wealth should go up togheter at a comparable rate to avoid screwing too much with the WBL.
That said, is ok for some encounter to reward more exp than loot and vice versa. Still exp reward should be comparable with the encounter difficulty.
do any of you wish you had this level of freedom? within reason of course.
I am a gm, I have that freedom.
The two ways I'd add to XP for wealth is if I'm being mean and the treasure gets used up by plan, "They spent all their money on necklaces of fireballs, welcome to reflexaplooza." Or if the wealth gets used like an ability, like batman.
do any of you wish you had this level of freedom? within reason of course.
I am a gm, I have that freedom.
The two ways I'd add to XP for wealth is if I'm being mean and the treasure gets used up by plan, "They spent all their money on necklaces of fireballs, welcome to reflexaplooza." Or if the wealth gets used like an ability, like batman.
i agree with that
i give more XP for foes who prebuff or presummon before the fight with resouces the party won't be able to loot very well. such as batman or the guy who buys nothing but consumables
but the character with permanent equipment or unused consumbles, i let the party loot that equipment and/or those consumbles
most of the time, the excessive wealth i give NPCs, is in gently used emergency consumbles for the party to loot anyway. mostly partially charged wands a specific PC truly wanted to acquire or something like a permanent item that stores a property for a character to pre-enchant their weapon in advance by storing the property for later, materia style.
|
I agree that the equipment itself is more than enough reward for the extra effort needed to defeat the enemy. If anything, a NPC/monster that's heavily equiped would be worth LESS XP, in my opinion.
Of course, we're assuming that the NPC/monster USES their gear. If it sits in a chest unused, then they DEFINITELY shouldn't have their XP affected.
I agree that the equipment itself is more than enough reward for the extra effort needed to defeat the enemy. If anything, a NPC/monster that's heavily equiped would be worth LESS XP, in my opinion.
Of course, we're assuming that the NPC/monster USES their gear. If it sits in a chest unused, then they DEFINITELY shouldn't have their XP affected.
i agree with this as well.
just because the king has a castle, doesn't mean the king is worth extra experience.
the guards and servants might be worth Experience if they try to resist. maybe not the common conscripted infantry, but officers and elite squads of varying power, possibly.
I agree that the equipment itself is more than enough reward for the extra effort needed to defeat the enemy. If anything, a NPC/monster that's heavily equiped would be worth LESS XP, in my opinion.
Of course, we're assuming that the NPC/monster USES their gear. If it sits in a chest unused, then they DEFINITELY shouldn't have their XP affected.
i agree with this as well.
just because the king has a castle, doesn't mean the king is worth extra experience.
the guards and servants might be worth Experience if they try to resist. maybe not the common conscripted infantry, but officers and elite squads of varying power, possibly.
Heheheh. I'll be honest...most of my players would be hesitant to try to start trouble with a lot of basic infantrymen or palace guards. Most of them would be CR 1/3, with the highest being no more than CR 6 I'm sure. But the beautiful thing about humanoids is you can take a lot of CR 1/3s and use their teamwork to be very dangerous. :P