I am not sure if this is outlined in the rules . I might not have read them closely enough
I understand xp budgets and how you increase them for a larger group
But also XP is given evenly to each player based on the level of the foe.
But what if there are more players
So if there is a party of 4 x level 3 vs a level 5 monster they get the XP for a +2 monster
But what if there were 6 PCs in the very same fight ? Do you apply the player adjustment mentioned as a deduction in this case ? Or do they get the same XP as in scenario one
There is every chance this is in there and I have never needed to look and now my book is with my brother
You can always reference archives of nethys or PF2e easy tool
Anyway the answer is, you don't award any adjusted EXP, you don't divide the exp between players.
A moderate encounter is worth 80exp for instance and will always give out 80exp to each player. The encounter budget is separate to the exp value attached to the difficulty value and is always a quarter of whatever the base budget/award is.
e.g.
A moderate encounter is worth 80exp, for a party of six it is a budget of 120exp (80+20+20) and equivalent to a severe encounter for a party of 4. Each player receives 80exp if they defeat the encounter.
I recommend having a look at the tables and figuring out how the math works, it is simple and once you learn it you will never forget it and you won't need to ever look at the charts again (like with DC by level charts)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I understand all what was said but in some instances it doesn’t make sense to bump up the encounter
If there (for example) is a level 5 solo monster that has no obvious or sensible minions but the PCs bring allies then the encounter becomes much easier
Not every combat is able to be tailored . I accept most are
Pathfinder 1st Edition lists the experience of a challenge for the entire party. If a 4-member party defeated a lion, 800 xp in PF1, then each party member received (800 xp)/4 = 200 xp.
Pathfinder 2nd Edition divides by 4 in advance. If a 1st-level 4-member party defeats a lion, creature 3, each party member receives 80 xp, because a creature 3 is a moderate challenge to a 1st-level 4-member party.
If the party ha 5 members, then the challenge of a single lion is less because the party can put 25% more resources against it. In PF1 this is treated by dividing the experience points by 5 instead of 4. In PF2 the Different Party Sizes section, page 489 of the PF2 Core Rulebook, recommends increasing the difficulty of the challenge by 25%. The lion would gain a 20-xp companion, a creature -1 such as a giant rat. Such pairings don't exist in nature. Even adding a lion cub would change the nature of the battle.
We could instead simply accept that a single lion is a lesser challenge, 4/5 of the challenge since we have 5/4 of the expected party. Thus, we could multiply the 80 xp by 4/5 to get 64 xp. The math balances, since a 4-member party earns 4×80 xp = 320 xp and a 5-member party receives 5×65 xp = 320 xp. A lion is always worth 320 total xp to a 1st-level party.
I use this general principle for estimating the total challenge against the 4th-level 5-member party in my campaign. In their most recent battle, they fought 1 creature 7, 1 creature 5, 1 creature 2, and 2 creature 1. The xp values add up to 120 + 60 + 20 + 15 + 15 = 230 xp. But really the threat level is 0.8×320 xp = 184 xp. This was the final boss battle of the module, intended as an extreme 160-xp threat, but my players are good at tactics and need threats slightly above extreme. Nevertheless, it felt more like a 184-xp battle than a 230-xp battle. I gave each party member 184 xp.
For a 6-member party, multiply by 4/6.
Take the standard monster of your own level. Take a party of four level 4 heroes facing a single Owlbear (level 4).
On its own, this encounter is Trivial, meaning that you should normally not award each character 40 XP. Instead they should get nothing (barring unusual circumstances).
The rules say nothing about denying experience points for a Trivial encounter.
Trivial-threat encounters are so easy that the characters have essentially no chance of losing; they shouldn’t even need to spend significant resources unless they are particularly wasteful. These encounters work best as warm-ups, palate cleansers, or reminders of how awesome the characters are. A trivial-threat encounter can still be fun to play, so don’t ignore them just because of the lack of threat.
Just because a party has close to zero risk of losing an encounter (i.e., Total Party Kill) does not mean that the encounter does not cost them heavily. The 3rd-level 5-member party in my campaign lost half their hit points to a Gelatinous Cube, creature 3, therefore a trivial encounter. The cube had major terrain advantage. The PCs did not know the right tactics against a Gelatinous Cube. One hour's rest could have restored them, except that the extreme-threat enemy in the next room was going to enter the cube's room in half a minute. Sometimes the resources lost in a trivial encounter are vital.
What this is saying that since the party can defeat a nearly limitless string of single Owlbears without challenge or hardship, there shouldn't be any XP in it.
No, against a stream of single owlbears, one per minute, the archers will expend all their arrows, the melee fighters will suffer an occasional 1d10+6 damage from the owlbear's talons, and the spellcaster who can cast cantrips all day will sometimes have a critical failure against the owlbear's bloodcurdling screech and flee for 1 round. The PCs won't be able to take 10 minutes for Treat Wounds or Refocus, so gradually they will be nibbled down to nothing. One owlbear per hour would still use up arrows.
And I have a strong risk that the druid will deal with the owlbears peacefully.
Now the real reason for Paizo's insistence you should always patch up the encounters to keep the challenge (rather than hand out less XP to each character):
If you don't you will have to add more encounters to make characters reach 1000 XP and level up when playing official APs!
Pathfinder 2 is so delicately balanced that it doesn't work well to play a chapter underleveled or overleveled.
If you play in sandbox of your own devising, this isn't a problem, because you don't have chapters that assume a certain level.
My players just finished Trail of the Hunted. In that module, they deliberately skipped 250 xp of encounters and delayed two encounters to later levels so earned 40 xp less. In addition, I removed 440 xp of encounters as not appropriate to the story anymore, because the players took a different approach than the module writer expected. That adds up to -730 xp.
I also added 200 more xp of encounters. I beefed up a few encounters to be more challenging, so throw in another 40 xp. The players earned a bigger mission reward, 200 more xp, due to rescuing twice as many villagers as expected. And they sought out on their own 290 more xp in encounters not in the module. That adds up to +730 xp.
I believe strongly in player agency and frequently adjust the adventure path to fit what my players want to do.
As thenobledrake said, even if you don’t feel it’s appropriate to add more creatures adding the elite template can help, or you could add in a small natural hazard to make the terrain more dangerous. You could also recalibrate the EXP, bringing what was was a serious encounter down to a moderate.
Personally I’d probably try and adjusted the encounter. And if I can’t find a good way to do that leave the experience alone. The players thought ahead enough to recruit help which is worth some reward. And the difference between the two experience totals is fairly small, it’s unlikely to add up to even a level over time. If my players started doing this all the time I might start building for those stronger encounters regularly to keep the fights interesting but That’s about it.