Quote from: Ravenswing;812156Interesting you should mention GURPS in this context, because GURPS has an extremely NON-granular XP system compared to many a game system.  

For those of you unfamiliar, the guidelines given in GURPS 3rd are, per session:

+1-3 pts, for good roleplaying;
-1-5 pts, for poor roleplaying;
+2-4 pts, for successful completion of a mission;
-1-2 pts, for partial failure of a mission or significant setbacks in a multi-session adventure;
-4-5 pts, for disastrous failure of a mission;
+1 pt, for a clever action or solution to a specific problem, in character, per action.

The recommendation is for 2-3 pts/session on the average, never to go below zero, never to go above five.

A similar system could be bolted on to any game system which hands out XP, D&D included.  Just decide how much XP constitutes a good day of play, a great day of play, or a rotten day of play, and work the percentages from there.  That way, you don't have to worry at all how much XP to hand out for a tough guard as opposed to a not-so-tough guard as opposed to a tough guard who was drunk, as opposed to ...

While the method of giving out XP in point based systems like GURPS and HERO might be considered non-granular by your definition the actual spending of that XP on character development is not.

Quote from: Ravenswing;812156Interesting you should mention GURPS in this context, because GURPS has an extremely NON-granular XP system compared to many a game system.  

I was addressing Emperor Norton's suggestion for rewarding (to paraphrase) stealth kills and the like, when the OP is playing D&D, a system notorious for not supporting a firing squad, let alone a knife-kill.

Sure, you can house rule these things extensively but classes like the Assassin kind of complicate the issue as they already have some capability in this area.

I'm genuinely interested in suggestion for how to make it work, other than playing a game which does support more 'realistic' damage.

Quote from: dbm;812210I was addressing Emperor Norton's suggestion for rewarding (to paraphrase) stealth kills and the like, when the OP is playing D&D, a system notorious for not supporting a firing squad, let alone a knife-kill.

Sure, you can house rule these things extensively but classes like the Assassin kind of complicate the issue as they already have some capability in this area.

I'm genuinely interested in suggestion for how to make it work, other than playing a game which does support more 'realistic' damage.

So it's not about the experience points at all; it's about whether you can achieve a stealth takedown?

It seems unlikely to me that the guard will have 50 HP; but if the guards are that tough, then you probably have very high level player characters who can deliver 50 points of damage quickly enough that he can't get the alarm off. If the DM is trying to make it feasible (but not certain) for a sneak attack to work, then the average guard is not going to be as strong as one PC and isn't going to have a bunch of other guards with him or close enough to hear a round of ordinary combat (maybe make the players roll a stealth check to be quiet enough). (Realistic damage isn't going to help if the guards are squads, each with the same hit points the player characters have.)

For more reasonable guard HP totals, if you do sneak up on the guard, you should get a surprise round plus a regular round, and the guard should not be able to sound the alarm until his action in the regular round. The rogue will get sneak attack (likely twice due to good initiative bonus). The fighter could get a lot of attacks (Extra Attack, Action Surge). And the spell casters might be able to take the guard out immediately anyway (2nd level spell slot on sleep jumps to mind for my 3rd level sorcerer - averages 31.5 HP by itself - and that's ranged and pretty quiet).

As you note, a more focused murderous character is possible: a 3rd level rogue with the assassin archetype and two shortswords would average 28 points of damage plus dexterity bonus [after making a stealth check - possibly with double proficiency and dexterity bonuses - above the target's passive perception and two attack rolls with advantage (proficiency and dexterity bonus)]. That's not an extreme optimization or an unusual approach for an assassin. But a 3rd level fighter with great sword and action surge could average over 16 plus twice strength bonus [if hitting with both], close to the average HP (21) for such a fighter with no constitution bonus.

In D&D I prefer that it's not trivial for one character to slit a guard's throat, because sooner or later (usually sooner) my PC is going down from that realistic combat, and that doesn't feel very heroic.

Quote from: rawma;812269that doesn't feel very heroic.

A lot of this comes down to what kind of heroism you are interested in, or whether you care about it at all.

I wasn't suggesting extra xp for stealth kills, that was just how Far Cry 3 handled it, and how it encouraged a specific approach to the game. I was suggesting xp for planning and executing plans rather than rushing in crazy.

It was a "reward what you want to see your characters do" thing, you got lost in the specifics of the example.

Quote from: Will;812273A lot of this comes down to what kind of heroism you are interested in, or whether you care about it at all.

Maybe I should have said "doesn't feel very much like D&D"? I have no problem with people liking other games with different kinds of heroism, but if you're going with what D&D does in normal cases you're going to have to accept the consequences in edge cases.

I guess, ultimately, the system constrains the level of smart thinking you can apply. Smart thinking in DnD tends to be around arranging resistance against appropriate damage types, preparing the most useful spells and the like. It's not always possible to model real-world tactics or approaches effectively given some of the fundamental mechanics of the game (most notably HP and fairly binary health).

It's when you try to go beyond these fundamental assumptions that things get a little weird.

But all games pretty much have them. If you tried to take on a dozen foes in GURPS or Runequest you would probably be toast, but a high level character in DnD can probably stand against multiple low level opponents without too much risk of death (5e bounded accuracy not withstanding).

Quote from: dbm;812210I was addressing Emperor Norton's suggestion for rewarding (to paraphrase) stealth kills and the like, when the OP is playing D&D, a system notorious for not supporting a firing squad, let alone a knife-kill.

Sure, you can house rule these things extensively but classes like the Assassin kind of complicate the issue as they already have some capability in this area.

I'm genuinely interested in suggestion for how to make it work, other than playing a game which does support more 'realistic' damage.

(shrugs)  You had the suggestion.  And of course this involves house ruling: how else would you do it?

This doesn't require you to switch systems.  The GURPS method bolts perfectly well onto D&D.  If a suggested average GURPS XP session = 2-3 pts, then all you need do is figure out what you consider to be an average D&D XP handout ... and the beauty is that this can be tailored for all tastes.  You think that it's more important for a player to be excellent in combat than in roleplay?  Then make a disproportionate daily award for excellence in combat.  You want to place a priority on clever problem-solving?  Then make a disproportionate award for that.

I expect a D&D player who's been at it for more than a few months has a perfectly good handle on how much XP should be handed out.  (Hell, if you've got a regular group, why not spend ten minutes before the next session chalk-talking the system out?)

Quote from: Ratman_tf;811782I think this is a pretty important point. Which is why I'm wondering if there's some way Wood Elf can tweak his style to have more fun with that, instead of trying to beat a different play style into the players.

Well if I had players that all they did was jump into a meatgrinder willy nilly EVERY TIME... it can get a little old when options were presented but are never taken.

That and in some RPGs combat takes up alot of time. Whereas in 5e D&D combat breezes along. And it wasnt that bad in BX or AD&D either. Least wasnt for us. As a DM I like a balance. Also as a player. I love to negotiate with encounters. But I also like to poke into places I shouldnt and face whatever thingies crawl out of the woodwork.

Its also possible the players really like the combat side. Some really get into it and some dont. Or they really like rolling up new characters. Some get into that too.

But in the end the DM is pushing all the right buttons somehow. An achievement others wish they could pull off.

Quote from: Ravenswing;812329(shrugs)  You had the suggestion.  And of course this involves house ruling: how else would you do it?

I think his concern was "how do you reward stealth kills with a system that doesn't really allow for stealth kills".

He got caught up in the details of the example, rather than the general point.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;812021Maybe you should just award EXP for gold only like AD&D.

I thought of doing that myself for 5E. Or does that break the system?

That could actually increase the kill-a-thon as now the PCs have no other way to get EXP other than killing everything and looting. You might entice with quest rewards. But thats going to possibly become pocket change compared to just loot-n-plunder unless you cleave close to 5es very treasure low premise.

Quote from: Omega;812372That would actually increase the kill-a-thon as now the PCs have no other way to get EXP other than killing everything and looting. You might entice with quest rewards. But thats going to possibly become pocket change compared to just loot-n-plunder unless you cleave close to 5es very treasure low premise.

Uh, you just make sure the bulk of the treasure isn't carried by monsters/people.

Quote from: Omega;812372That would actually increase the kill-a-thon as now the PCs have no other way to get EXP other than killing everything and looting. You might entice with quest rewards. But thats going to possibly become pocket change compared to just loot-n-plunder unless you cleave close to 5es very treasure low premise.

But everyone says in AD&D it discouraged people from killing since it wouldn't gain them exp; it would just be a distraction and they would want to steal it without getting into combat.

Right now, I'm awarding EXP for completing tasks. But I found a problem with that too: what tasks do you give exp for? How do players know which tasks are "exp approved" ones and not just something random they decided to do? Are they going to expect exp every time they do the smallest errand? Couldn't any successful action be spun as a task? "We defeated these zombies; they won't hurt anyone, so we did the task of making this place safer."

This is an area I think it'd be GOOD to emulate video games.

Have a card, including ones you make up on the spot, saying 'Goal: make area safer' and set it down when it comes up.

You might also mark it with Minor/Standard/Major or whatnot, add extra cards as optional extras, etc.

Variety is an asset, so players can choose what interests them and is up to their level of challenge ("Mapper, which way to the stairs back up?").

In a big and long campaign, everything will eventually suit someone; the toughest puzzle will get solved, the toughest monster foiled, and likewise the Hapless Tribe of kobolds (or replacement, if they're wiped out) meet their modest match.