PDA

View Full Version : D&D 3.x Other An Alternative XP Formula



Altrunchen
2014-03-10, 10:18 AM
One thing I dislike about 3.5e is the emphasis on combat it has. I personally like to reward players for successful skill checks or for role-playing well with xp since those are also types of experience as well.

But the rewards for quests and for skill checks can be kind of paltry compared to the ordinary rewards for combat. So I came up with a slower combat-xp calculation formula bearing in mind that xp can also be earned from successful skill checks or from quality role-playing at the DM's discretion.

I also am sick of leveling up characters every other session :smalltongue:.

Anyhow...here's how I run Xp:

Xp Required to Level-Up:
(Level+Level Adjustment)*1000

Skill Check Xp Reward:
DC*10

Role-Play Xp Reward:
*varies at Dm's discretion*

Quest Xp Reward:

Note: I haven't implemented this particular rule yet. But I'm planning on developing it more to replace my older, much worse rule of just 200 xp per quest completion regardless of anything else.

Quest Difficulty Categories:
Each percentage is multiplied by the amount of xp required to level up at the quest's beginning. This xp is given upon the completion of a quest and does not include XP earned from Role-play, combat, skill checks, or anything else.

Extremely Easy +5%
Very Easy +10%
Easy +15%
Fair +20%
Moderate +25%
Challenging +30%
Difficult +35%
Very Difficult +40%
Extremely Difficult +45%


Quest Difficulty Criteria:
When classifying a particular quest when the time comes to distribute xp, consider these factors in making your decision.

Strength of opposition (whether combat or not)
The presence of a deadline.
Amount of required conditions to be met.
Strictness of aforesaid conditions.
Abnormality compared to previous/other quests that the party has engaged in.
Ease of completion that the party / individual proceeded with regardless of other factors.


Main-Quest Difficulties:
If your campaign has a Big-Bad or is episodic in nature and is leading to some huge culmination of some sort, then you might consider these for your longer-term quests.


Heroic +100%
Fabled +150%
Mythical +200%
Legendary +250%
Epic +300%


Combat Xp Reward:

PL = "Player Level" = Class Level + LA

PS = "Party Size" = number of players in the party.

AvPL = "Average Party Level" = (sum of all player class levels in party with their LA included)/number of members in the party

Cr = "Challenge Rating" = the Challenge rating of the group of monsters encountered. If one encounter has monsters of varying challenge ratings, then calculate xp for each different Challenge Rating.

Quan = "Quantity" = Number of monsters per different Cr encountered. I.e. if there are 4 cr = 1/4 monsters and 5 cr = 1 monsters, then calculate xp for the cr 1/4 monsters and then the cr 1 monsters separately and then add the rewards together.

Formula:

BaseXP = (Cr/AvPL) * (100*1.25^Cr)*Quan

Individual Combat XP reward = (BaseXP/PS)*(AvPL/PL)

Jallorn
2014-03-10, 03:43 PM
How are you determining the DC of a quest?

For that matter, what exactly does a quest entail? It's a pretty broadly used word.

Altrunchen
2014-03-10, 04:21 PM
How are you determining the DC of a quest?

For that matter, what exactly does a quest entail? It's a pretty broadly used word.

Well, in the past I always gave 200 xp for completing a quest. Which was completely baseless and probably had no real sense of reward with it. So I tried coming up with something a bit more defined and rewarding.

And normally I improvise my quests as I go. It's only recently that I've been running Tomb of Horrors.

I think I might remove the DC for the quests, as I'm too lazy to calculate the ECL of EVERY encounter, trap, puzzle, and stuff and then come up with a module-like plan/calculation. In hindsight, that was too optimistic since I generally prefer having an open-ended campaign where I can breathe as a DM and improvise.

I think I'll change it to be a DM-discretion thing. Meaning that you use the scale to judge how easy of a quest it was for the group.

Difficulty would NOT NECESSARILY equal brevity though. Difficulty would be more along the lines of:


Strength of opposition (whether combat or not)
The presence of a deadline.
Amount of required conditions to be met.
Strictness of aforesaid conditions.
Abnormality compared to previous/other quests that the party has engaged in.
Ease of completion that the party / individual proceeded with regardless of other factors.


What do you think?

Grod_The_Giant
2014-03-10, 04:38 PM
I'd go with your original idea of experience rewards as a function of (current) level, but with a single adjustment for "easy" or "hard"-- the more qualifications and complications you try to take into account, the harder your rule becomes to use. Better to just take a quick glance at a table, like so:

{table=head]Level|Easy Quest|Normal Quest|Hard Quest
1|50|100|150
2|100|200|300
3|150|300|450
4|200|400|600
5|250|500|750
6|300|600|900
7|350|700|1050
8|400|800|1200
9|450|900|1350
10|500|1000|1500
11|550|1100|1650
12|600|1200|1800
13|650|1300|1950
14|700|1400|2100
15|750|1500|2250
16|800|1600|2400
17|850|1700|2550
18|900|1800|2700
19|950|1900|2850
20|1000|2000|3000[/table]
(With a base reward of 10% experience, plus or minus 5%)

Altrunchen
2014-03-10, 05:03 PM
I'd go with your original idea of experience rewards as a function of (current) level, but with a single adjustment for "easy" or "hard"-- the more qualifications and complications you try to take into account, the harder your rule becomes to use. Better to just take a quick glance at a table, like so:

{table=head]Level|Easy Quest|Normal Quest|Hard Quest
1|50|100|150
2|100|200|300
3|150|300|450
4|200|400|600
5|250|500|750
6|300|600|900
7|350|700|1050
8|400|800|1200
9|450|900|1350
10|500|1000|1500
11|550|1100|1650
12|600|1200|1800
13|650|1300|1950
14|700|1400|2100
15|750|1500|2250
16|800|1600|2400
17|850|1700|2550
18|900|1800|2700
19|950|1900|2850
20|1000|2000|3000[/table]
(With a base reward of 10% experience, plus or minus 5%)

That IS a faster method, true enough. But not all quests are created equally, so I have a nagging curiosity what a more open-ended grading criteria might be like. I just think that perhaps a more subjective method of appraising such a volatile subject (in terms of variation) might better reflect the party's unique situations and circumstances. But your method definitely would cut the process's time down to size, no doubt.