Alternative XP Reward System - Opinions? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Alternative XP Reward System - Opinions? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Tassyn
02-19-04, 03:42 PM I got my copy of Unearthed Arcana yesterday, and I must say I'm very impressed with the additional alternatives provided there in, most specifically the alternative xp reward system. From what I can tell, it makes planning out encounters and rewarding experience much easier and faster than it was previous always having to cross reference something on a chart. Still, I have some hesitation about utilizing it due to concerns involving game balance. What does everyone else think of this? Anyone else adopting this into their campaigns? Anyone find something flawed or unbalanced in the new system?
strenoth
02-19-04, 05:30 PM Well, at least it doesn't give more XP for the creature having more HP... (Any one else remember the old monster XP chart in the 1st ed book? I knew some one who was actually convinced that it ment when you killed a goblin you got 1 hp added to your characters' total/maximum hp)

It's nice for simplicity, but I think I'll keep with the default Xp system.
Elsbon
02-19-04, 07:09 PM You mean you actually uses the XP system in the book? Man, everytime we've ever played, the GM eventually gives up trying to figure out how to account for all the creatures we fought, considering the modifications, combinations, conditions, etc...

And eventually just comes up with a number based on how much we accomplished. Faster and not based on how much you kill (silly idea).

-Eric
Tassyn
02-19-04, 08:06 PM Originally posted by strenoth
Well, at least it doesn't give more XP for the creature having more HP... (Any one else remember the old monster XP chart in the 1st ed book? I knew some one who was actually convinced that it ment when you killed a goblin you got 1 hp added to your characters' total/maximum hp)

It's nice for simplicity, but I think I'll keep with the default Xp system.

Well, you can adjust the CR of the creature with more hit dice or character levels using the same process as written in the Monster Manual. The best part of the new system is that it gives flat xp for monsters instead of xp rewards appropriate to party level. Whereas I do appreciate the original system for its accuracy, I do enjoy the simplicity in the new one, as well as rewards for killing weak creatures. Sure, a 20th level character shouldn't be going after goblins looking for big xp, but at least the new system rewards them with some xp instead of the old system that would give them nothing for it. That's just my personal preference.
Tassyn
02-19-04, 08:10 PM Originally posted by Elsbon
You mean you actually uses the XP system in the book? Man, everytime we've ever played, the GM eventually gives up trying to figure out how to account for all the creatures we fought, considering the modifications, combinations, conditions, etc...

And eventually just comes up with a number based on how much we accomplished. Faster and not based on how much you kill (silly idea).

-Eric

I use it only in determining xp for monsters/villains defeated, as I think it's important to give specific and appropriate awards for difficult adversaries - the very thing that CR and the xp table is built for. On the other hand, individual xp rewards for good roleplaying, problem solving, and mission/chapter completion are always assigned by me solely. The new system just makes the table stuff easier.
Elrond's Dad
02-19-04, 11:16 PM One thing I've recently started doing is giing each person a number of XP based on how hard the fight was for them. A 20% fight (standard encounter) garners 75 XP/character level... tougher and weaker challenges scale up and down in increments of 25 XP, respectively. It works nice, and the DM is always the final judge...
stilleon
02-20-04, 05:58 PM I think the new XPs are da bomb! Much much much easier.

Should have been this way from the beginning. I hate the XP chart in the DMG.
stone_dog
02-20-04, 06:13 PM Yeah it is easier, but I don't think it is better. I much prefer characters earning less XP for defeating weak monsters than this way. I can see somewhere some 15th level character about to level asking his GM where a villiage of orcs that he can slaughter are to push him over the edge.

Eh, different GM's different styles.

Now the XP chart given (6-13) might work out fine for a gestalt group. I'll have to take a good long look at that.
Tassyn
02-20-04, 07:14 PM Originally posted by stone_dog
Yeah it is easier, but I don't think it is better. I much prefer characters earning less XP for defeating weak monsters than this way. I can see somewhere some 15th level character about to level asking his GM where a villiage of orcs that he can slaughter are to push him over the edge.

Eh, different GM's different styles.

Now the XP chart given (6-13) might work out fine for a gestalt group. I'll have to take a good long look at that.

I can see how a "power gamer" could abuse this new xp system by seeking out weak combatants to level up quickly, but in the case of my group that isn't much of a concern. Also, as the experience progression increases to astronomical numbers (440,000 at 15th level), killing 50 CR 1 Orcs for 15000 xp (300 x 50), you can plainly see that is isn't an effective way to level quickly at higher levels. In the case of the second xp system compared to the first, the former would reward you for such a battle, as easy as it might be, versus the latter that would reward you with nothing.
stilleon
02-20-04, 07:21 PM About a high level character seeking out tins of CR1's to kill:

1. As a DM I'd hate it. Don't :censored::censored::censored::censored: off the DM.
2. In the UA it tells you about this and suggests NOT giving out XPs for CR's that are too low (just as on the DMG version)

It's up to the DM to keep it fair, and up to the players not to ruin the game for everyone else.
Dunelord
02-21-04, 04:11 AM Originally posted by Elsbon
You mean you actually uses the XP system in the book? Man, everytime we've ever played, the GM eventually gives up trying to figure out how to account for all the creatures we fought, considering the modifications, combinations, conditions, etc...

And eventually just comes up with a number based on how much we accomplished. Faster and not based on how much you kill (silly idea).

-Eric

How hard is it to use the system? If you are 5th level and help kill a CR 6 creature you get a the XP for level 5 defeating a CR 6. If your party is 3 people you split that 3 ways. If there are 2 you get it twice. How is that so complicated you can't do it? And as to all the conditons it suggests only doing that in extream circumstances, not every little thing.
Tassyn
02-21-04, 11:55 AM Originally posted by Dunelord
How hard is it to use the system? If you are 5th level and help kill a CR 6 creature you get a the XP for level 5 defeating a CR 5. If your party is 3 people you split that 3 ways. If there are 2 you get it twice. How is that so complicated you can't do it? And as to all the conditons it suggests only doing that in extream circumstances, not every little thing.

The process starts getting more and more complicated the more adversaries you toss into the battle. I'm not saying that process of figuring out appropriate encounters is difficult - just overly complicated. The new system just makes it easier with little or no loss in accuracy.
stilleon
02-21-04, 12:04 PM Also, when creating an adventure it will be easier to mix CRs together and calculate the XPs.
Sammael_the_Chosen
02-21-04, 03:39 PM Er... why is everybody referring to this system as "new?"
Keeper of the Dark Realms
02-22-04, 01:04 AM Originally posted by Sammael_the_Chosen
Er... why is everybody referring to this system as "new?"

Heh- not sure. Been around since 1e. Well, before 1e actually. :D The system is "new" to 3e/3.5 I suppose.
aldymnor
02-22-04, 01:53 AM Originally posted by Sammael_the_Chosen
Er... why is everybody referring to this system as "new?"
Because to 3e it is new, just like the name "Unearthed Arcana." Neither are new to D&D, but to this edition they are.

Oh god don't argue about 3.0 and 3.5. You know what I mean. :smirk:
flyingmoose
02-22-04, 02:28 AM I love it. This was the only reason I ever considered playing 2e.

It's great not just for single monster encounters, but you can take just about anything and compare it to such an encounter. "Hmm... is disarming this trap difficult like beating an advanced otyugh or difficult like beating a gauth?"

Ya know, a friend of mine was once in a game where killing an ant got you 1xp, which is why I thought the Munchkin card "Boil an Anthill: Go up a level" was so funny.
Zaebos
02-22-04, 05:35 PM Originally posted by Tassyn
The process starts getting more and more complicated the more adversaries you toss into the battle. I'm not saying that process of figuring out appropriate encounters is difficult - just overly complicated. The new system just makes it easier with little or no loss in accuracy.

The system as presented in 3.0 and 3.5 is tremendously easy to figure out. It isn't overly complicated, even with a ton of opponents to calculate CR's for. 5 minutes at the end of each game, and BANG! its done. No hassle. I even award differnent xp's based on level of individuals not based on group level either, unless the entire group is the same CL (or ECL, as the case may be) and it still doesn't take much time at all.

I never did like the experiance charts from basic to 2e, always seemed over much to award that kind of xp. 2+ million xp's for level 20? Why? Why not keep the numbers as low as possible and go from there...

I personally don't like the system as presented in the UA, since it looks much too much like the old systems that I never really liked then either.

I prefer the 3.0/3.5 take on xp.
WotC_JoT
08-02-04, 05:42 PM Originally posted by stone_dog
Yeah it is easier, but I don't think it is better. I much prefer characters earning less XP for defeating weak monsters than this way.

If I did the calculations right, then the variant XP system in UA works just the same way that the standard system does. For example, if you're in a party of four 7th-level characters, the party has to defeat the same number of CR 2 creatures to go up to 8th level no matter which system you're using.

Standard system: 350 XP per creature, split 4 ways is 87.5 XP per character. To gain 7,000 XP, the party needs to defeat about 80 CR-2 creatures (which could be about 13 encounters of about 6 creatures each, as 6 CR-2 creatures amount to EL 7).

UA system: 600 XP per creature, split 4 ways is 150 XP per character. To gain 12,000 XP, the party needs to defeat about 80 CR-2 creatures (which could be about 13 encounters of about 6 creatures each, as 6 CR-2 creatures amount to EL 7).

Th difference is that the UA system shorts you for fighting weaker creatures automatically, without the DM having to compare CR to PCs' levels. It's basically the same system, only with all the math built into the characters' XP table so that the XP-by-CR table can be simpler.

In the standard system, you don't get any XP for creatures 8 levels below you. The DM should use the same rule of thumb when using the level-independent system in UA.
Deathmage
08-03-04, 02:30 AM I love the EXP table in UA

First of, as a DM, it's much easier to figure out the EXP for an encounter.

2nd, it encourges more item creation. In the system in the PH, making a item set you back more then what most people would like to say. However in this system, it's not nearly as bad. let me give you an example.

currently if you cast wish, it's 5000EXP, which from 19th to 20th level means you can cast it about 3 time. in the UA system, it costs 50000EXP, but you have MUCH more space, so you can cast it more like 15 (last i recall, book not in front of me).

I never made a spell caster that used item creation, it was always so much EXP you had to spend, and then you'd fall behind everyone else. of course, i don't get to play that often, thanks to the fact I'M THE ONLY :censored: GOOD DM I KNOW!!!

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Tassyn 02-19-04, 03:42 PM	I got my copy of Unearthed Arcana yesterday, and I must say I'm very impressed with the additional alternatives provided there in, most specifically the alternative xp reward system. From what I can tell, it makes planning out encounters and rewarding experience much easier and faster than it was previous always having to cross reference something on a chart. Still, I have some hesitation about utilizing it due to concerns involving game balance. What does everyone else think of this? Anyone else adopting this into their campaigns? Anyone find something flawed or unbalanced in the new system?
strenoth 02-19-04, 05:30 PM	Well, at least it doesn't give more XP for the creature having more HP... (Any one else remember the old monster XP chart in the 1st ed book? I knew some one who was actually convinced that it ment when you killed a goblin you got 1 hp added to your characters' total/maximum hp) It's nice for simplicity, but I think I'll keep with the default Xp system.
Elsbon 02-19-04, 07:09 PM	You mean you actually uses the XP system in the book? Man, everytime we've ever played, the GM eventually gives up trying to figure out how to account for all the creatures we fought, considering the modifications, combinations, conditions, etc... And eventually just comes up with a number based on how much we accomplished. Faster and not based on how much you kill (silly idea). -Eric
Tassyn 02-19-04, 08:06 PM	Originally posted by strenoth Well, at least it doesn't give more XP for the creature having more HP... (Any one else remember the old monster XP chart in the 1st ed book? I knew some one who was actually convinced that it ment when you killed a goblin you got 1 hp added to your characters' total/maximum hp) It's nice for simplicity, but I think I'll keep with the default Xp system. Well, you can adjust the CR of the creature with more hit dice or character levels using the same process as written in the Monster Manual. The best part of the new system is that it gives flat xp for monsters instead of xp rewards appropriate to party level. Whereas I do appreciate the original system for its accuracy, I do enjoy the simplicity in the new one, as well as rewards for killing weak creatures. Sure, a 20th level character shouldn't be going after goblins looking for big xp, but at least the new system rewards them with some xp instead of the old system that would give them nothing for it. That's just my personal preference.
Tassyn 02-19-04, 08:10 PM	Originally posted by Elsbon You mean you actually uses the XP system in the book? Man, everytime we've ever played, the GM eventually gives up trying to figure out how to account for all the creatures we fought, considering the modifications, combinations, conditions, etc... And eventually just comes up with a number based on how much we accomplished. Faster and not based on how much you kill (silly idea). -Eric I use it only in determining xp for monsters/villains defeated, as I think it's important to give specific and appropriate awards for difficult adversaries - the very thing that CR and the xp table is built for. On the other hand, individual xp rewards for good roleplaying, problem solving, and mission/chapter completion are always assigned by me solely. The new system just makes the table stuff easier.
Elrond's Dad 02-19-04, 11:16 PM	One thing I've recently started doing is giing each person a number of XP based on how hard the fight was for them. A 20% fight (standard encounter) garners 75 XP/character level... tougher and weaker challenges scale up and down in increments of 25 XP, respectively. It works nice, and the DM is always the final judge...
stilleon 02-20-04, 05:58 PM	I think the new XPs are da bomb! Much much much easier. Should have been this way from the beginning. I hate the XP chart in the DMG.
stone_dog 02-20-04, 06:13 PM	Yeah it is easier, but I don't think it is better. I much prefer characters earning less XP for defeating weak monsters than this way. I can see somewhere some 15th level character about to level asking his GM where a villiage of orcs that he can slaughter are to push him over the edge. Eh, different GM's different styles. Now the XP chart given (6-13) might work out fine for a gestalt group. I'll have to take a good long look at that.
Tassyn 02-20-04, 07:14 PM	Originally posted by stone_dog Yeah it is easier, but I don't think it is better. I much prefer characters earning less XP for defeating weak monsters than this way. I can see somewhere some 15th level character about to level asking his GM where a villiage of orcs that he can slaughter are to push him over the edge. Eh, different GM's different styles. Now the XP chart given (6-13) might work out fine for a gestalt group. I'll have to take a good long look at that. I can see how a "power gamer" could abuse this new xp system by seeking out weak combatants to level up quickly, but in the case of my group that isn't much of a concern. Also, as the experience progression increases to astronomical numbers (440,000 at 15th level), killing 50 CR 1 Orcs for 15000 xp (300 x 50), you can plainly see that is isn't an effective way to level quickly at higher levels. In the case of the second xp system compared to the first, the former would reward you for such a battle, as easy as it might be, versus the latter that would reward you with nothing.
stilleon 02-20-04, 07:21 PM	About a high level character seeking out tins of CR1's to kill: 1. As a DM I'd hate it. Don't :censored::censored::censored::censored: off the DM. 2. In the UA it tells you about this and suggests NOT giving out XPs for CR's that are too low (just as on the DMG version) It's up to the DM to keep it fair, and up to the players not to ruin the game for everyone else.
Dunelord 02-21-04, 04:11 AM	Originally posted by Elsbon You mean you actually uses the XP system in the book? Man, everytime we've ever played, the GM eventually gives up trying to figure out how to account for all the creatures we fought, considering the modifications, combinations, conditions, etc... And eventually just comes up with a number based on how much we accomplished. Faster and not based on how much you kill (silly idea). -Eric How hard is it to use the system? If you are 5th level and help kill a CR 6 creature you get a the XP for level 5 defeating a CR 6. If your party is 3 people you split that 3 ways. If there are 2 you get it twice. How is that so complicated you can't do it? And as to all the conditons it suggests only doing that in extream circumstances, not every little thing.
Tassyn 02-21-04, 11:55 AM	Originally posted by Dunelord How hard is it to use the system? If you are 5th level and help kill a CR 6 creature you get a the XP for level 5 defeating a CR 5. If your party is 3 people you split that 3 ways. If there are 2 you get it twice. How is that so complicated you can't do it? And as to all the conditons it suggests only doing that in extream circumstances, not every little thing. The process starts getting more and more complicated the more adversaries you toss into the battle. I'm not saying that process of figuring out appropriate encounters is difficult - just overly complicated. The new system just makes it easier with little or no loss in accuracy.
stilleon 02-21-04, 12:04 PM	Also, when creating an adventure it will be easier to mix CRs together and calculate the XPs.
Sammael_the_Chosen 02-21-04, 03:39 PM	Er... why is everybody referring to this system as "new?"
Keeper of the Dark Realms 02-22-04, 01:04 AM	Originally posted by Sammael_the_Chosen Er... why is everybody referring to this system as "new?" Heh- not sure. Been around since 1e. Well, before 1e actually. :D The system is "new" to 3e/3.5 I suppose.
aldymnor 02-22-04, 01:53 AM	Originally posted by Sammael_the_Chosen Er... why is everybody referring to this system as "new?" Because to 3e it is new, just like the name "Unearthed Arcana." Neither are new to D&D, but to this edition they are. Oh god don't argue about 3.0 and 3.5. You know what I mean. :smirk:
flyingmoose 02-22-04, 02:28 AM	I love it. This was the only reason I ever considered playing 2e. It's great not just for single monster encounters, but you can take just about anything and compare it to such an encounter. "Hmm... is disarming this trap difficult like beating an advanced otyugh or difficult like beating a gauth?" Ya know, a friend of mine was once in a game where killing an ant got you 1xp, which is why I thought the Munchkin card "Boil an Anthill: Go up a level" was so funny.
Zaebos 02-22-04, 05:35 PM	Originally posted by Tassyn The process starts getting more and more complicated the more adversaries you toss into the battle. I'm not saying that process of figuring out appropriate encounters is difficult - just overly complicated. The new system just makes it easier with little or no loss in accuracy. The system as presented in 3.0 and 3.5 is tremendously easy to figure out. It isn't overly complicated, even with a ton of opponents to calculate CR's for. 5 minutes at the end of each game, and BANG! its done. No hassle. I even award differnent xp's based on level of individuals not based on group level either, unless the entire group is the same CL (or ECL, as the case may be) and it still doesn't take much time at all. I never did like the experiance charts from basic to 2e, always seemed over much to award that kind of xp. 2+ million xp's for level 20? Why? Why not keep the numbers as low as possible and go from there... I personally don't like the system as presented in the UA, since it looks much too much like the old systems that I never really liked then either. I prefer the 3.0/3.5 take on xp.
WotC_JoT 08-02-04, 05:42 PM	Originally posted by stone_dog Yeah it is easier, but I don't think it is better. I much prefer characters earning less XP for defeating weak monsters than this way. If I did the calculations right, then the variant XP system in UA works just the same way that the standard system does. For example, if you're in a party of four 7th-level characters, the party has to defeat the same number of CR 2 creatures to go up to 8th level no matter which system you're using. Standard system: 350 XP per creature, split 4 ways is 87.5 XP per character. To gain 7,000 XP, the party needs to defeat about 80 CR-2 creatures (which could be about 13 encounters of about 6 creatures each, as 6 CR-2 creatures amount to EL 7). UA system: 600 XP per creature, split 4 ways is 150 XP per character. To gain 12,000 XP, the party needs to defeat about 80 CR-2 creatures (which could be about 13 encounters of about 6 creatures each, as 6 CR-2 creatures amount to EL 7). Th difference is that the UA system shorts you for fighting weaker creatures automatically, without the DM having to compare CR to PCs' levels. It's basically the same system, only with all the math built into the characters' XP table so that the XP-by-CR table can be simpler. In the standard system, you don't get any XP for creatures 8 levels below you. The DM should use the same rule of thumb when using the level-independent system in UA.
Deathmage 08-03-04, 02:30 AM	I love the EXP table in UA First of, as a DM, it's much easier to figure out the EXP for an encounter. 2nd, it encourges more item creation. In the system in the PH, making a item set you back more then what most people would like to say. However in this system, it's not nearly as bad. let me give you an example. currently if you cast wish, it's 5000EXP, which from 19th to 20th level means you can cast it about 3 time. in the UA system, it costs 50000EXP, but you have MUCH more space, so you can cast it more like 15 (last i recall, book not in front of me). I never made a spell caster that used item creation, it was always so much EXP you had to spend, and then you'd fall behind everyone else. of course, i don't get to play that often, thanks to the fact I'M THE ONLY :censored: GOOD DM I KNOW!!!