Experience Points in 4th Edition DND

This is going to be about role playing in 4th Edition while not using experience points.

To format this a bit, I'll first explain why I have decided to get rid of xp in DND 4th Edition, and then explain some of the pros and cons to doing so. Just so you are aware beforehand, I have never been opposed to implementing any "House Rule" if I felt it would benefit the players and improve my game.

That being said, I have decided to run my latest game in a somewhat free-form style.

The point to the game is that the world is open and changes drastically between sessions. The players are able to act how they want with few restrictions, as long as they keep attempting to achieve the one goal I had burdened them with before the game began.

I wanted to allow the players to see the story change based on their own actions, to know the choices they make are what ultimately determines their fate.

Plus, they chose to be heinously evil. Yay to horrendous acts of violence!

And we are back on track.

As with each new game, I was very worked up for the first session. My personal goal was to blend White Wolf with 4th Edition. Character-driven story with a fantasy setting I knew and was familiar with? Yes, please!

I had it all set up and was ready to go. Most of my music was picked out (I like to procrastinate.). There were a ton of NPCs, over 20 fight scenarios, tons of Adventure Tools monsters, and no restrictions to prevent the players from experiencing the world however they chose. And that is what they did.

The outcome was less than one hour of PC to NPC or PC to PC interaction and about four hours of combat.

This was not unwanted, mind you, but it was not completely expected. I was surprised by how much interaction wasn't going on, given the propensity our group has towards role playing their characters out. A loop was thrown and I was Bowser. See note.

(Alright, quick note: From what I understand, being thrown/knocked for a loop has origins in comic-strip characters reacting so hard to, say, a hit, that they literally roll over, creating a loop effect. If you have ever played Super Smash Bros. Brawl, you'll know that Bowser can literally be knocked for a loop. Giggle. Giggle giggle.)

There were a couple things that seemed to be the culprit.

First, one of the reasons behind this xp onslaught is my admittedly subpar GM skills when it comes to making the situations characters are in compelling. Self-deprecating behavior aside, it is true. The solution, of course, is to put more effort into my games, and, more importantly, to PRACTICE them.

The other reason is a bit more vague. It is me realizing that if no skill challenges are won, no battles are fought, and no quests are completed, no xp will be gained.

Even when the characters were given free reign in my game, their initial response was an outpouring of physical violence towards unsuspecting foe. I do not blame them, as I would have done the same thing. Wererats deserve what they get. However, if a game is meant for the players to role play and experience the world, xp still needs to be gained to advance in levels.

So, with my idea in mind, to free as many binds as I could break and to open up the world so the players can interact more with their characters and really feel as if they are part of the world, I have taken experience points out of my game.

Here are what I feel some of the pros and cons are to removing xp from 4th edition games.

PROS

**********No grinding for xp**********

A player should never feel the need to grind in a role playing game; they should never feel the need to hurry through a session for fear of not gaining a desirable amount of xp, or assume that they are so close to gaining a level that if they barrel through enough fights, by the end of the evening they will be one level higher. With xp taken out of the equation, grinding is also gone. I'm am not saying the players are not allowed to pick fights whenever they wish, nor I am saying a GM cannot force the characters to barrel through five fights in a row. The goal is not to take fighting out of the game, but to impress upon the characters they don't need to fight. This relates to my next point.

**********Fighting is not the answer**********

Ideally, a lack of xp should also peal away at the box we, as players, can wrap ourselves in; the belief the problem the GM put before us is easily remedied by fighting (or a skill challenge). The bandits before us are our enemies and should be killed simply by being bandits and resting on the road. And if they aren't evil bandits, you, as the GM, need to immediately express this to the character. Even then, the players may instigate combat without ever using role playing or a skill check to determine the bandits' motives.

As players, we often times rely too much on our GM, waiting for them to set plot points for us to follow. This can create a game more linear than it was ever meant to be. Players may come up with two solutions, and completely skip over the fact there are three other solutions not yet explored. Taking away experience points will, hopefully, allow a player to cultivate and propose, if not use, these other solutions.

**********Less filler content**********

As GMs, we put ourselves in a similar box because the players expect us to give them enough quests, battles, and skill challenges per session so they can level up in a reasonable amount of time. A battle thrown in to help the players reach level five does not have to be a half hour of wasted time against enemies that are simply filler.

**********A GM must expect the unexpected**********

A GM will need to account for more, possibly obscure, scenarios from their players. Once a player does not feel the need to fight an enemy, they begin thinking of other ways to approach situations. A GM has to be aware the player will think of other, possibly ridiculous, ways a character can mess up a situation.

The idea here is the GM has to know their players and their world more so than before, as they need to account for unexpected scenarios the players throw at them. A more prepared and involved a GM becomes with their NPCs and cities, the easier it is for a player to remember an NPC or to keep a mental picture of the city in their head. This helps make the world feel more.

**********More original scenarios**********

By using xp, a GM is more or less restricted to having players participate in a certain amount of battles and/or skill challenges in a given session. However, without xp, a session may not even contain battles or skill challenges, as a GM can use scenarios they may normally stray from.

Perhaps the players are talking to spirits which tell the characters what they need to know. The spirits have no reason to keep information from the PCs, but the catch is the PCs only learn the answers to the questions they pose. Each question brings further insight to the PCs, who can now bounce more stable ideas off each other in order to come up with more questions for the spirits.

**********Sessions**********

The game can be however long you make it. With no xp in site, you can have a 10-15 session game the spans to level 30, or you can have a game that lasts five years. See the Session part in the CONS SECTION for more on this.

Those are the main benefits to removing xp from games. It isn't the full list, but I think I am hitting most of the important points. Now, on to some (not all) problems you may run into if you remove xp from your game.


CONS SECTION

********I may not enjoy what you enjoy********

As a quick note beforehand, I am neither saying I alone am right, nor am I saying I have thought up every situation in the book. I also must warn you that your group may not approach a game the same way as our group, or more importantly, the same way as me.

Essentially, everyone enjoys something different.

********Varying game lengths********

Depending on the players, what gets accomplished per session may increase or decrease dramatically. Perhaps the players are less focused on the main plot and become wrapped up in the politics of the country. Or, perhaps the players find a way to bypass a significant portion of plot.

********Dungeon crawls********

Dungeon crawls don't necessarily benefit from nixing xp like other game types do. They're often times more focused on battles and skill challenges than role playing. In this case, players in games like these may prefer the added experience points. A few extra winding paths and the players may make it to level five instead of level six. Experience points may give the players an added sense of accomplishment if that is what they are looking for.

Also, the paths the players can take and their solutions to problems are generally more linear in dungeon crawls than in epic games. For instance, the PC to NPC interaction may only get players a certain amount of information before the NPC's knowledge is expended. This limits a player's ability to interact outside the purview of combat and skill checks.

With a more linear dungeon crawl decreasing the amount that can be done with a given situation and having a noticeably finite amount of area to explore, along with the sense of accomplishment one gets while gaining xp, it seems to me removing xp may benefit a game less than keeping them in.

********Arbitrarily choosing places to level up********

You must figure out how to level up your party. Leveling them up arbitrarily is ill-advised. Choosing to level players up because they are about to fight a big dragon, or leveling them up at the end of a session after they spend the whole session accomplishing nothing isn't really benefiting your game.

As an alternate, leveling characters up at certain plot points or after significant events in the game gives you, as a GM, the ability to acknowledge the players' efforts and/or accomplishments by showing them, story-wise, what pushed them over the edge to that next level. It essentially allows you to integrate the act of leveling up into your game, whether it be through cool cutscenes or something else.

********Session loss = xp loss********

You may believe that a player missing a session or multiple sessions deserves less xp than the players always showing up. In this case, all players will be on the same playing field unless you can somehow work out a system to level up players depending on how often they show up.

To be honest, I have never been a proponent of players having different xp amounts. To me, it is reasonable to have all players the same level. Are all sessions worth an equal amount of xp? If not, what makes one person more deserving than the other, when both missed one four-hour session?

I understand trying to promote players to come to your game, but you're risking rewarding players who don't even participate over players who may simply have had something else planned. If you don't run on a regular schedule and they planned their activity beforehand, I am baffled as how it could be fair to punish them for something you have control over. I have other problems with doing this, but I'll just move on...

********Nothing happens because the players don't go anywhere********

This might be a bit out there, but it is possible players may not be as motivated to follow the plot if they can find something else that tickles their fancy. While I feel GMs should encourage strong characters, it is important that you, as a GM, make sure the players know before the first session what to expect out of the game and what you expect out of the players, even if it is as simple as telling them they should make characters willing to adventure.

Even so, wires between players and GMs can get crossed, and for one reason or another, your whole session dissolved into two characters trying to sell one goat to buy fifty chickens in order to start a farm (a good deal, indeed!). Funny as this is, constant sessions where one or two players spend the whole session doing their own side plots can devolve the game into something you never wanted it to be.


********Sessions**********

By removing xp, the game can be however long you want it to be.

That means the players can go six sessions or more without leveling up if that is what you choose. However, I would suggest against this type of approach, as leveling is an important part of role playing.

It is important to note removing xp from a game should not be used like this, as it may make the players feel like they are being punished. Whether you have a good reason to do so or not, I would at least inform your players ahead of time that levels won't come quickly, so they don't become frustrated.



That seems to be all I have for now! I will try being more punctual next time, though I'm still not sure what I'll write about.

I'd like to hear your questions, concerns, or comments. You can do that here or on twitter: www.twitter.com/house_rule.

-Ebo