|
Post by runequester on Dec 21, 2012 22:02:54 GMT -6
What do people generally do in their current games? Use the 100/level or the Greyhawk "guidelines" ? Something else entirely?
|
|
monk
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 237
|
Post by monk on Dec 21, 2012 23:23:23 GMT -6
This time around I've been using the 100/HD, divided by level. When I did the math a few times, it turned out that it gets the PCs out of level one faster, but then takes tehm a bit longer to progress once they're up in the 3-5 range (since the baddies start to have more special abilities). I kinda like it, actually.
|
|
|
Post by runequester on Dec 22, 2012 0:17:41 GMT -6
That is pretty appealing, in fact.
|
|
|
Post by verhaden on Dec 22, 2012 9:12:15 GMT -6
Ditto. I like 100/HD for its sheer simplicity, too. I don't like referring to books when I run games, if I can help it, so it works great for me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2012 11:00:19 GMT -6
Use 1 XP per GP like the LBBs say.
Experience is for treasure. Monster XP is chump change. Wandering monsters are supposed to be a hazard, not levels on the hoof.
|
|
|
Post by inkmeister on Dec 22, 2012 11:25:58 GMT -6
I know that a number of respected folks here don't even bother with XP; you go up a level whenever it feels right to the whole group or after a preset amount of time (time spent playing = experience gained). I would strongly consider this approach depending on the goals of my game. The classic expectation is that you adventure to get treasure, and in that context, XP for gold makes sense.
What I take from Mike's (Gronan) point is that really the game is already rewarding you for dealing with monsters when you get treasure; presumably you had to charm, trick, defeat monsters and NPC's in order to get the treasure, so rewarding XP for monsters is a sort of double reward.
You have to balance it all against the fact that most people today don't play nearly as much as the original groups played. Thus, it makes sense for some groups to give out more XP and level faster. In that case, 100xp/monster HD makes a lot of sense. That's how I'm playing right now. It seems like a good baseline approach. But if you find that your players are simply waiting around for wandering monsters and getting into fights just to get XP, you might lower the XP for monsters.
I think it is good to have a loose approach to it. That's what I found after I used the Greyhawk guidelines for a B/X game; doing things by the book, with the dungeon stocking tables and the standard XP made the game seem ridiculous as far as leveling was concerned. You risk your life repeatedly for little chunks of 50xp or so at a time. As much as I like level 1, I don't want to stay there forever.
|
|
|
Post by talysman on Dec 23, 2012 0:32:52 GMT -6
I use 100 xp per HD. I've thought about using just 20 xp per HD, but awarding the full 20 xp to each adventurer, instead of dividing xp by # of characters.
|
|
|
Post by blackbarn on Dec 29, 2012 18:07:05 GMT -6
We've been using 1 xp per gp, and 100 xp per hd. Seems to work well for a game meeting every week.
|
|
|
Post by cyclopeatron on Jan 10, 2013 8:58:17 GMT -6
100 XP / HD has worked perfectly for me because I prefer running treasure-poor games. I've found it's more fun and challenging when characters aren't swimming in 1000s of GP. I still want characters to level in a timely way though, especially since it's hard for me to squeeze sessions in more then once or twice a month these days. I ran a B/X game by the book and it took a ~18 sessions to barely get to level 3. We had tons of fun, but it would have been nice for characters to level slightly faster given our slow rate of gaming (these 18 sessions took a few years, yikes).
|
|
|
Post by Ynas Midgard on Jan 10, 2013 10:13:41 GMT -6
I use HD square times 10, divided between characters: 1 HD = 10 XP 2 HD = 40 XP 4 HD = 160 XP 6 HD = 360 XP etc.
I don't bother with special abilities and the like, just use the sheer HD stat.
|
|
|
Post by cooper on Jan 10, 2013 12:44:10 GMT -6
I play in a 1 on 1 campaign. When my nephew's 4th level fighter fights an ogre, 400xp seems absolutely reasonable as his risk of harm is very real. When considering that any henchmen or hirelings--which at this point is a single henchmen, helps as well, the combat portion is now 200xp per character. More than reasonable for the fight itself, but not so lucrative that alternate means of getting to the ogres treasure stash become non-starters.
So is the risk of harm that a 1st level fighter faces against a single orc, as such 100xp for this evenly matched life or death struggle seems a fair reward for the victorious 1st level character, who can then look forward to 6 more gp from the gold on the orcs person.
When one follows the rules on dungeon levels as well, such that a 4th level fighter killing an orc only nets 25xp, overall it seems quite balanced.
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Jan 10, 2013 16:45:16 GMT -6
I seem to run mostly play-by-post games in recent years, with occasional table top games now and then.
I find the 100 XP per HD method to be extremely convenient, and I also like how it can potentially help starting PCs get past level 1 quickly.
I add "HD" (for XP) to monster special abilities like poison or paralysis and so on.
I divide XP between the PCs that participate in a combat, with NPCs getting a half share.
I don't often bother factoring in the PC level versus they dungeon level they are on.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2013 17:07:13 GMT -6
I think that method––extra HD per special ability––is very convenient. Good work. I'd give only 50 xp per HD.
|
|
|
Post by runequester on Jan 10, 2013 22:38:15 GMT -6
yeah tossing in an extra level or two for abilities and it's all pretty good stuff.
|
|
|
Post by makofan on Jan 11, 2013 8:05:23 GMT -6
I am using 100xp/hd in my OD&D games and the players and myself really like it. It helps kickstart the first few levels
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2013 19:17:37 GMT -6
I think that method––extra HD per special ability––is very convenient. Good work. I'd give only 50 xp per HD. Just noticed the Empire of the Petal Throne gives out 50 XP / HD and the old Warlord of Mars game (from '74) give out 25 XP / HD but characters only need half of the XP as in D&D so it's also effectively 50.
|
|
Torreny
Level 4 Theurgist
Is this thing on?
Posts: 171
|
Post by Torreny on Feb 10, 2013 15:10:48 GMT -6
I've been a fan of the 100 per monster level. As people have said, it makes those first few a bit faster, and the later levels a bit slower. This works well with the idea that 1st to 3rd level men are the mundanes, and have earned decent (but not powerful) competency in combat, without having to slaughter droves and droves of the most plentiful (1st level) foes, just to be where they are.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2013 20:23:17 GMT -6
Another way to do it, if you are playing a huge hexcrawl (my favorite type of game , is to give 50 xp/hex survived/# of surviving characters, awarded as a lump sum once the party returns to civilization.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Mar 1, 2013 13:48:28 GMT -6
The referee’s judgement must be used to determine such matters.
|
|