We gave up individual XP over a decade ago, and don't miss it.  It's rather shocking to me to hear people do it any other way anymore.  Although I'm contemplating bringing some form back for my first 5E, only because it was kind of fun to have people level up at different times.  The only reason I'm not seriously considering it is because all the classes have the same XP leveling rate.  I miss the days of Thieves leveling faster than Paladins  I thought it was an interesting balancing mechanic.

But thanks, Beagle, for implying that I am a weak gamemaster.  But if that puts me in the company of Blacky, I'm all good with that form of weak

Quote from: Blacky the Blackball;784627I always give out XP equally - even when players have to miss a session and someone else plays their character for them. XP is a measure of how experienced the characters are, not a Pavlovian reward for the players playing the way I want them to play.

Yep. The only time I don't give out equal XP is when a PC isn't played at all in a session.

And 5E already has a reward for players playing the way you want them - inspiration.

I play RPGs to have fun with friends.

I really don't need more judgmental hoops to hop through to game 'right.'

I'm also wondering, if individual xp rewards end up with people leveling at the same rate... why are you bothering with the extra overhead?

Quote from: Tommy Brownell;784609I found out later from a friend that played 3.5 under this guy and quit, that he gives melee characters 20% more XP per encounter...

Up through here it just sounds like he's reinvented separate xp charts by class.  Which is not entirely a bad idea if you're playing 3E to high level.  I wouldn't immediately go there for a 5E game, before we really know how it balances out in extended live play.

On the other hand, this...

Quote from: Tommy Brownell;784609...and only gives spellcasters XP based on the spells they cast in a session.

Looks more like a bad idea on its face.  Why penalize a player for holding spells in reserve and seeing how far he can get with a molotov cocktail and a bag of marbles?  If you're going that route at all, I'd probably take a page from Rolemaster and early D&D and go all in.  XP for spell research, lore research more generally, and magic item creation for starters, rather than spells only.

That said, I wouldn't myself use individual xp awards in quite that way, or even play in that kind of game again.  My player-side experience with it in a 2E game was a net negative.  Then I tried it years later on the GM side for an L5R game and dropped it almost immediately.

My experience was it didn't actually encourage good play either tactically or socially; if anything it penalized it.  Tactically, sometimes the smart play is for a fighter to take rearguard at the risk of sitting out some fights, or a mage to memorize comprehend languages even if its not used as often as magic missile.  Socially, it encourages a Jeopardy-like, first to ring in dynamic.  Everyone wants to get the killing blow/solve the puzzle/say the right thing to the npc/blurt out a plan so you get the bonus idea xp.  That's not for me.  As a player and a GM, I'd rather game with people who've got the maturity to realize, "hey, Joe-Bob seems like he's got this, I'll back him up but let him have the spotlight this time" without being penalized for it.

Quote from: Blacky the Blackball;784654Agreed. That's what we do in my groups.

It has nothing to do with experience points though.

Yes. Obviously, a built-in reward mechanism has nothing to do with actually  rewarding actions. XP are a way to substantiate the whole process. Just expressing respect is nice and all, but it is a lot more vaporous if it lacks a concrete core. Actual rewards with a recognizable added value (like XP) do add this additional substance to the whole measure and thus increases the gravitas of the whole construct. In comparison to an actual, concrete reward, the mere idea of appreciation always rings a bit hollow.  Would you give your significant other a heartfelt handshake instead of a birthday present?

Quote from: Blacky the Blackball;784654Enjoying the game is its own reward, and if someone else enjoys it more than me then good for them.

See, passively enjoying the game is the bare minimum, at best. RPGs are a group effort and live and die with each group's member's attention and contributions, active participation and actually caring. Just having fun is a good beginning, but not the end of it. So, the question shouldn't be how much anyone enjoys the game, but what you actually do to make it as enjoyable as it can be without becomming a chore - both for you and for your fellow players.
In this context, I found that a continuous reward mechanism that actually is directly linked to the concrete actions of the players is an effective instrument to keep the players motivated and at the same time, by establishing a link between an action and a feasible benefit - within the context of the game - the reward becomes more direct.
Besides, and it sound blatantly obvious, rewards work. They do contribute to the enjoyment of the game, because it is actually fun to get stuff.

Quote from: Blacky the Blackball;784654This is still nothing to do with experience points. Again, you're characterising a character getting more experienced at what they do as being a reward for players.

And? The character is little more than an outgrowth of its player and doesn't count nearly as much as the actual person who plays that role.
If I'd run a game where character development is only directly linked to the character's actual experiences, I wouldn't use XP at all and use a system like Runequest or HarnMaster where improvement of skills is the direct result of using certain skills or active training within the game (which I do, with great enjoyment); if you use an abstract form of character advancement like generic XP in the first place, it is pretty clear that trying to establish a direct link between character improvement and previous actions feels quite shoehorned.

Quote from: Blacky the Blackball;784654And how on earth do you measure who's "trying hardest" to make it fun for everyone, anyway?

When I think someone did something awesome, I'll make a little note. Admittedly, that is a rather subjective way to measure these things, but if my players wouldn't trust my judgement in these minor aspects of the game, I think I would have failed the group anyway.

Quote from: Blacky the Blackball;784654[...] the actions of the players will have consequences out of game in terms of how much fun everyone is having, and this will reinforce popular actions and provide negative feedback to unpopular ones.
But none of this has anything to do with experience points.

This is an artifical division between two linked elements of gameplay. There is really no need (or a good reason) to use two different approaches to various permutations of the same pattern of action and consequences.

Quote from: Blacky the Blackball;784654Experience points are not part of the feedback and response. They are not a "reward" for "good play".

Why? Because you refuse them to use them to this purpose (and therefore refuse a suitable and actually useful instrument to provide the guidance expected from a gamemaster)? That doesn't change a bit of how XP work as a reward. The fact that one might refuse to go swimming also has limited effect on the buoyancy of the human body.

Quote from: Blacky the Blackball;784654It is unfair, by the way, since it is assuming that people who do things differently actually agree with your preferred way to do them but are too cowardly to put it into practise, rather than giving them the benefit of the doubt and accepting that they do things differently because they actually disagree with your preferred way.

Of course it's unfair. If you can distribute the XP rewards unfairly among your players  by not taking their actual contributions to the game into account, I can be unfair with my judgements. It is rather childish, I know. But, you are wrong in one point in particular: I usually do not care that much if other people play in a different style than what I prefer. I am not the greatest gamemaster there ever was, and not everything I do in my groups would translate well to other groups, due to different social dynamics (as well as tastes). That should really go without saying. In this particular case however, I see this a bit more negatively, because of the inherent unfairness of the whole affair.

There's something that seems really patronizing about awarding XP for gaming 'right.'

In my experience, if someone really isn't contributing... there are reasons that extra incentives won't fix. And if you press it and Not Contributor starts being weaker than the rest of the party, they are less likely to contribute or more likely to simply not show up.

Now, in certain environments this might work out well, like university or something with lots of potential players and a competitive atmosphere. 'Keep up or GTFO'

So many dimensions to this, starting with whether XP are meant to reward players, or to represent "experience", or to represent meta-game "fictional weight". Or a combination. Frankly I think it's a combo in D&D and in any case very hard to nail down even for a given player.

What I'd consider is making divergent XP awards per class. Everybody gets XP for accomplishing goals. Fighters also get XP for fighting. Wizards get XP for spell research/practice, which is very costly. Clerics for sacrifices and donations. Thieves--maybe fighting, in addition to successfully using Thief skills under pressure. Maybe let thieves and fighters also spend money on training (say 1GP=1XP, but cap the amount at 20% of what it takes to make the next level.)

Then also give lots of other ways to spend cash; make sure that players understand the value of hirelings; give ample social advantages for spreading wealth around the community and/or maintaining a high standard of living. Like giving charisma bonus when appropriate and making it easier to attract henchmen.

I would suggest that in 5e things like Inspiration already provide a model for immediate feedback to inspire involved play.

I don't use individualized XP awards simply because, over the years, I've come to find them a pain to track. There's already enough for me to handle as a GM; I don't need to worry about marking down skill failures/successes, successful hits, spells casts, etc. Hell, I still get shivers when I remember how MERP gave out XP for miles traveled. So pure logistics is what gets me giving out equal rewards per session (or just leveling people up at a regular pace).

Quote from: Beagle;784703See, passively enjoying the game is the bare minimum, at best. RPGs are a group effort and live and die with each group's member's attention and contributions, active participation and actually caring. Just having fun is a good beginning, but not the end of it. So, the question shouldn't be how much anyone enjoys the game, but what you actually do to make it as enjoyable as it can be without becomming a chore - both for you and for your fellow players.
In this context, I found that a continuous reward mechanism that actually is directly linked to the concrete actions of the players is an effective instrument to keep the players motivated and at the same time, by establishing a link between an action and a feasible benefit - within the context of the game - the reward becomes more direct.
Besides, and it sound blatantly obvious, rewards work. They do contribute to the enjoyment of the game, because it is actually fun to get stuff.

I feel sorry for you that your players need "concrete" rewards in order to motivate them to have fun. I tend to find in my groups that fun it its own reward.

Quote

Quote from: Blacky the BlackballAnd how on earth do you measure who's "trying hardest" to make it fun for everyone, anyway?

When I think someone did something awesome, I'll make a little note. Admittedly, that is a rather subjective way to measure these things, but if my players wouldn't trust my judgement in these minor aspects of the game, I think I would have failed the group anyway.

Just as I suspected. It's not about rewarding the person who is trying hardest (as you previously claimed) at all, but about rewarding players for doing things that please you - that you find "awesome".

As Will says, how terribly patronising that sounds.

QuoteThis is an artifical division between two linked elements of gameplay. There is really no need (or a good reason) to use two different approaches to various permutations of the same pattern of action and consequences.

What are you talking about? I said nothing about "using different approaches", or "using approaches" at all for that matter. I was pointing out that feedback loops naturally occur in both character actions and player actions without anyone needing to take any kind of "approach" or deliberately use any kind of reward system at all.

QuoteOf course it's unfair. If you can distribute the XP rewards unfairly among your players by not taking their actual contributions to the game into account, I can be unfair with my judgements. It is rather childish, I know.

You said it.

QuoteBut, you are wrong in one point in particular: I usually do not care that much if other people play in a different style than what I prefer. I am not the greatest gamemaster there ever was, and not everything I do in my groups would translate well to other groups, due to different social dynamics (as well as tastes). That should really go without saying. In this particular case however, I see this a bit more negatively, because of the inherent unfairness of the whole affair.

You haven't yet explained how it is unfair to have characters gaining experience at the same rate regardless of whether you find their players "awesome" or not.

Quote from: Obeeron;784673We gave up individual XP over a decade ago, and don't miss it.  It's rather shocking to me to hear people do it any other way anymore.

Why would you find it shocking that some people do things differently than you do.

What I find shocking is the number of people who seemingly cannot even conceive of how or why a different group might choose to award experience in a different manner than how their group does experience awards. I know I can easily make a list of pros for the methods of experience awards I don't use and a list of cons for the methods I do use.

Quote from: Vargold;784715So pure logistics is what gets me giving out equal rewards per session (or just leveling people up at a regular pace).

Not wanting to do the work necessary for tracking individual rewards is a perfectly valid reason to give out group experience awards.

Quote from: Blacky the Blackball;784718You haven't yet explained how it is unfair to have characters gaining experience at the same rate regardless of whether you find their players "awesome" or not.

Well here's one explanation. Some people see experience awards as being related to what the character actually does or experiences in the game world rather than as some metagame pacing mechanic. Since in a given adventure different characters will do or experience different things - I would say that is an obvious axiom really, it is unlikely that they will or should each always gain the exact same experience. By giving them the exact same experience each time you are unfairly awarding extra experience to the character who did and experienced relatively little on the adventure while unfairly taking away experience from the character who did or experienced a lot on the adventure so as to arrive at some middle of the road experience award for everyone in the group.

I'm kind of schocked that I had to actually type all that out given how obvious the point seems.

The thing with giving xp for only spells cast, is that it discounts the ability to learn by seeing someone else do something, which is a really basic idea. The group xp is much more sensible.

I have liked very direct 'reward by doing' systems, like BRP.
You use a skill? Check it. At the end of the session, go through every skill that's checked and roll against it. If you fail, you gain points in the skill.
This sets up a dynamic where you are encouraged to try different things, and there's diminishing returns as you get better, it's hard to improve.
More importantly, IMO, it doesn't involve any real judgment calls to determine if someone is doing it 'right.'

Notably, though, BRP isn't a level system, which adds a different spin on things.

Non-level systems, like Traveller are fine, I like them, but I don't use xp in them either. Often I'll grant the entire party a point to increase something, if they can give an adequate reason why.