How I gave different XP to each player

[abk108]

I guess any method is as good as any other, but I thought I'd like to share what I've done with my first session (it is actually a D&D3.5 game, but the same can be applied to any game really).

I had a total 1400 XP to divide among 4 PCs.

Instead of getting mad about individual rewards for each action etc etc, I decided to look at it like this: each PC should ideally get 25%.
So since 2 fared better than the others, and one was worst than any other, I decided to divide XP adjusting the percentage, always totalling 100%.

I gave 23% to the worst player, 25% to the average one, and 26% to the two best players.
So P1 got 322, P2 got 350, P3 and P4 got 364.

[Pilgrim]

Just curious, but, what constitutes worst, average and best?

[abk108]

Just curious, but, what constitutes worst, average and best?

Oh sorry I thought it was clear. I mean, I had 4 players, and some did better than others at roleplaying so i think they deserve a small incentive.

Good Rolelplaying for me is:
- behave as your character would
(if you said you're the spiritual kind of guy, who doesn't care about gold pieces, then don't be greedy when you find a ruby!! "Hey I said gold pieces, this is a ruby" -.- ?? )
- Speak "In character"
(use the PC names, not the players names. Use an appropriate language.)
- don't metagame
(just because I pulled out a battle map, you can't start skulking around if you failed the appropriate Perception roll)
- divide Character and Player knowledge
("everyone knows trolls are vulnerable to acid and fire" .. hell no, most people don't. Very few met a troll then managed to get away to tell about it. You roll the appropriate Knowledge!)
- Don't powerplay
("i take 2 levels of thief to get Evasion, the 2 levels of Paladin to get Divine Grace... etc etc and so on")
- Don't attempt exploit shady areas of the rules
(you won't manage it anyway)
- Don't attempt to trick the GM
(I'll find out. And you'll regret it.)
- Don't work against the story, the GM or the party
(everyone is there to have fun)



I think that each "infraction" might cost 1-2%.
So someone who does everything I wrote above, ( A VERY BAD PLAYER!) in a 4 pc game would get... instead of 25%, something between 17% and 9% of the total XP (depending on how often and how badly he infringed the "good roleplaying standards")

Then any excess will be distributed among the other players, based on merit.
---

In my game, the "worst" player did some minor METAGAME (n3), some minor OUT OF GAME KNOWLEDGE (n4) and maybe attempted to TRICK the GM (n7) but i'm not sure about this. I decided a 2% penalty would be ok.

This gave me 2% extra points to distribute among 3 players, so I gave them to the most deserving two, based on my impressions.

[finarvyn]

abk108, that's a nice list.

[meinvt]

Good Rolelplaying for me is:
- behave as your character would
(if you said you're the spiritual kind of guy, who doesn't care about gold pieces, then don't be greedy when you find a ruby!! "Hey I said gold pieces, this is a ruby" -.- ?? )


I like this one.

- Speak "In character"
(use the PC names, not the players names. Use an appropriate language.)

I'm okay with this as long as you aren't requiring first person versus third person references to be "good".

- don't metagame
(just because I pulled out a battle map, you can't start skulking around if you failed the appropriate Perception roll)

I dislike this one a bit. I've learned it is hard to tell when players are metagaming, and everyone's interpretation is different. To me, failing a perception roll means I didn't notice anything. But, if I'm clearly in a dangerous place that is exactly why I should look around more closely.

- divide Character and Player knowledge
("everyone knows trolls are vulnerable to acid and fire" .. hell no, most people don't. Very few met a troll then managed to get away to tell about it. You roll the appropriate Knowledge!)

I agree with this somewhat, but I also think it is up to the DM to make rulings on this.

- Don't powerplay
("i take 2 levels of thief to get Evasion, the 2 levels of Paladin to get Divine Grace... etc etc and so on")

I completely disagree with this. Players want to be cool. Sometimes that means taking abilities to get better at what they want to do. Unless they are stealing other player's spotlight what is the harm?

- Don't attempt exploit shady areas of the rules
(you won't manage it anyway)

Again, I don't like this as an XP reward factor. Either it is okay, or it isn't. If you think this is exploitation it is a bigger conversation between player(s) and GM.

- Don't attempt to trick the GM
(I'll find out. And you'll regret it.)

I'm not sure what this means, but I definitely like being surprised as GM. Sometimes players manage to find ways to really pull one over on me, and it is great! Can you give an example of a "bad" tricking of the GM that doesn't fall into the exploit category above?

- Don't work against the story, the GM or the party
(everyone is there to have fun)

Absolutely! This is the number one factor for me. Still, everyone contributes in their own way and I have trouble 'choosing favorites'. I don't think it is fair to give one player less experience just because they are shier, quieter, or less of an armchair thespian.

I'd rather see a system with a baseline and then just a bonus for a few things:

* Point out a rule that hurts their character but the GM missed.
* Deliberately role play how their character reacts "sub-optimally" due to instinct or personality.
* Take a significant action that really helps a fellow party member shine.
* Has a moment that makes everyone at the table say "Cool!"

For each of the above the player might get a 5% bonus to XP for the session.

So, if you have 1,400 xp and 4 players that is 350 each. There is a bonus 17.5 XP for each of the above that each player does. So a player who points out that actually they missed on that attack because they were firing at a prone monster and later spends an action diving across the room to get a scroll to the wizard instead of doing something themselves they might get a bonus 35 XP for the session.

[abk108]

Good Rolelplaying for me is:
- behave as your character would
(if you said you're the spiritual kind of guy, who doesn't care about gold pieces, then don't be greedy when you find a ruby!! "Hey I said gold pieces, this is a ruby" -.- ?? )

I like this one


- Speak "In character"
(use the PC names, not the players names. Use an appropriate language.)

I'm okay with this as long as you aren't requiring first person versus third person references to be "good".
No, that's perfectly ok. I'm not fussy, but I think it helps the immersion in the story to like, roleplay the voice and accents of the character every now and then.

- don't metagame
(just because I pulled out a battle map, you can't start skulking around if you failed the appropriate Perception roll)

I dislike this one a bit. I've learned it is hard to tell when players are metagaming, and everyone's interpretation is different. To me, failing a perception roll means I didn't notice anything. But, if I'm clearly in a dangerous place that is exactly why I should look around more closely.
Pulling out your weapons anyway, since you're in a dungeon is reasonable. Like it is to not fully trust one against which you failed a Perceive Intentions roll. But if the character was NOT skulking around before I pulled out the map, and that section of the woods had (from the PCs point of view) nothing different from the rest of it, I see no reason why suddenly you can move tactically if before you were just jumping around on your pogostick, not caring about anything.
I mean, though your character might recognise a place as dangerous, it doesn't know you are on a battlemap.

- divide Character and Player knowledge
("everyone knows trolls are vulnerable to acid and fire" .. hell no, most people don't. Very few met a troll then managed to get away to tell about it. You roll the appropriate Knowledge!)

I agree with this somewhat, but I also think it is up to the DM to make rulings on this.
Well of course. But I like players to help me with that, because often it destroys the suspension of disbelief and the sense of wonder for new players, who never fought a troll and would've had a cool moment discovering their weapon was ineffective! Didn't we all have such a moment ?

- Don't powerplay
("i take 2 levels of thief to get Evasion, the 2 levels of Paladin to get Divine Grace... etc etc and so on")

I completely disagree with this. Players want to be cool. Sometimes that means taking abilities to get better at what they want to do. Unless they are stealing other player's spotlight what is the harm?
I can answer this in 3 points:
1)The problem is that every system can be broken, and a character might become too powerful via a combo and/or a RAW reading of the rules: this might lead to arguments about RAW vs GM's interpretation. By saying "don't powerplay" i tend to eliminate the chance of finding myself against a player who, craving to be as powerful as the rules allow, misread a feat or a spell in order to gain some uber benefit.
2) It makes no sense for a character to say "i want to be a paladin to get divine grace at 2nd level". A pc doesn't know that. A pc just knows that paladins have to obey a strict moral code to be supposedly shielded by their faith. Furthermore, if we're talking about a PC who wants to become a Paladin after a deep roleplaying experience, where it discovered faith and wished to serve the greater good, be my guest. But I expect you to take seriously your new vocation, as you would in real life... not to just botch it when you reach the level you wanted. And you should go in a church, pray a lot etc. Be paladin-ey for some time before you say, "I wanna be a paladin".
Also, if powerplaying was to become a common practice, we'd never see a character wielding anything but the best weapons (arguably Greatsword and Longsword for Martial, Morning star for Simple, these are just example off the top of my head). I'd never see someone use a glaive, a great flail, a sickle, or a scimitar (ok, druid use that). That's not realistic at all, and I like my players to create interesting characters via suboptimal choices: there maybe only one or two "BEST" options, but there are a lot sub-optimal options that could be explored! I, as the GM, promise I will never make you regret "damn, wish I'd gone for the greatsword instead of the Heavy Pick"
3)This might create problems from a balance point of view, which reflect into
a "spotlight" problem. If a player is a lot more concerned about damage per round, optimization, AC and so on than the other players, his PC would for sure be a lot more powerful. It's like having a couple of levels more than the rest of the party: the player can boss the others around, take risks that he's sure he'd overcome (while the others might die), and so on. This goes against the last point of my list , the "fun" one.
This comes from a personal experience:
"we were playing 4ed. A PC was already overly optimized (an 18 STR human 16 years old girl, Sorcerer level 8... that's already saying something), when it was the sole survivor of a dungeon. He looted the bodies, sold the equipment and bought a couple of items. Suffice it to say that she could cast spells with a 7 squares radius, had items that taken alone were worth double than what my shaman was allowed at Character Creation, had a base AC of 28 and could reach 34 (when the defender of the party had 24 and could go no further). It was like going around with an NPC that killed everything, and bossed you around well "because he's stronger than you". "
- Don't attempt exploit shady areas of the rules
(you won't manage it anyway)

Again, I don't like this as an XP reward factor. Either it is okay, or it isn't. If you think this is exploitation it is a bigger conversation between player(s) and GM.
I mean, if you have a doubt about how it should work beacuse as written it isn't clear, you should ask the GM before doing the action and assuming it works like that.
I'd like to point out the verb EXPLOIT. With that I meant that i'm not gonna punish someone for having a different view on a rule. I'm punishing people for exlpoiting on purpose a rule which clearly has holes, and requires some interpretation: they would just say "in the book it says..." and hold a grudge if you go against them.
This point is tied to the "powerplay" point and the "trick" point.

- Don't attempt to trick the GM
(I'll find out. And you'll regret it.)

I'm not sure what this means, but I definitely like being surprised as GM. Sometimes players manage to find ways to really pull one over on me, and it is great! Can you give an example of a "bad" tricking of the GM that doesn't fall into the exploit category above?
Bad tricking : PC casually asking "i'm taking an Elven light sword, ok?" hoping that I don't know it's Exotic, so if I didn't know better he'd have gone away with it without wasting a feat. Another Bad Tricking : not telling the DM about something AUTOMATIC that he'd should have done and he forgot, only because it's better for you. Like "good thing he didn't remember that drows are elves, immune to sleep!" , i heard players say after a game in which I was a player. I was shocked.

- Don't work against the story, the GM or the party
(everyone is there to have fun)

Absolutely! This is the number one factor for me. Still, everyone contributes in their own way and I have trouble 'choosing favorites'. I don't think it is fair to give one player less experience just because they are shier, quieter, or less of an armchair thespian.

.

I'd rather see a system with a baseline and then just a bonus for a few things:

* Point out a rule that hurts their character but the GM missed.
* Deliberately role play how their character reacts "sub-optimally" due to instinct or personality.
* Take a significant action that really helps a fellow party member shine.
* Has a moment that makes everyone at the table say "Cool!"

For each of the above the player might get a 5% bonus to XP for the session.

So, if you have 1,400 xp and 4 players that is 350 each. There is a bonus 17.5 XP for each of the above that each player does. So a player who points out that actually they missed on that attack because they were firing at a prone monster and later spends an action diving across the room to get a scroll to the wizard instead of doing something themselves they might get a bonus 35 XP for the session

I wholeheartedly approve all your points. That's the way I give rewards too: they are basically the opposite of my reasons for giving penalties.

I'd just like to point out that this way you might unbalance the expected grow ratio of PCs, if this means anything.
You thought you'd give the party 400 XP for that encounter, which is 100%. Then you give player A and B 10% extra, player C a 5% extra and none to player D. You ended up giving 125% of what you meant, a total of 500 XP instead of 400 XP. Repeating this over every single session/encounter, might cause your character to level up a couple of sessions earlier, so they'd find themselves in a dungeon level (or a portion of the story) not scaled for their level of power. What if in a session all the 4 PCs act perfectly and deserve a huge 20% bonus? Would you give away 80% extra XP?? That's dangerous, for me.

The way of "taking away, then redistributing" I proposed was meant to keep the net total of the XP the PCs get at 100%, not a kobold more.

[meinvt]

I think my difference of opinion is that a couple of the things you are penalizing with xp are things that I'd just allow, or disallow as a GM. If I thought a player were genuinely trying to cheat by knowingly asking if they could do things that were explicitly against the rules in hopes that by GM fiat it would suddenly become okay. Well, personally that isn't about a percent or two of experience. That is a question of whether we can have enough trust for them to continue to play in the group.

As to the total of experience awarded, yes, of course you could start with basis shares and then re-balance based on awards. I just don't like telling players they got an experience point penalty because they are role playing "wrong".

[finarvyn]

I just don't like telling players they got an experience point penalty because they are role playing "wrong".

I think it comes down to the group and the situation.

I remember a group in high school where one guy would sit and read comic books when it wasn't his turn to do something. Then the group would have to give him a quick update of the situation before he could act. To me, that was a clear case of the "wrong" way to role play. At least pay attention when the game is underway.

I've had some groups where metagaming is the norm and the group is happy with little out-of-character jokes and whatnot, so that style of play is "right" for that group. On the other hand, when I tried to run a horror campaign and got a steady stream of slapstick actions and OOC jokes it ruined the mood, so I'd say that was the "wrong" way to play.

There isn't a single set of rules that can apply universally, but I do think that the GM has to right to make suggestions on play style and (if the group in general is okay with it) enforce XP penalties to players who won't follow the rules.