XP in multi-leveled party

[Magile]

Option D, remove combat XP.

If you're fighting stuff, it's part of a DM plot, part of a static (NPC as DM?) plot, or "casual." Cutting xp from the "casual" fighting, I've seen it suggested more than once, though not to my recollection seriously debated in ALFA or among standards volunteers.

No.

Even xp split among the party as long as they are in the battle.

[AcadiusLost]

Of those three proposals, I like elements of both A and C- the even division I think would work out reasonably, because the highest level party member is being used to determine the challenge level/total XP. This means a mixed-level party would still have to beat something significantly tougher than it's highest level member to result in a heavily-weighted award for the lowest level PC. It still leaves the problem that the highlevel PC is still better off soloing the same mob for more XP. Actually, in the even-split model, the higher-level PC who is concerned about their precious combat XP rate would be even less willing to party up, because they'd end up earning a lot less for the same encounters, even more the more PCs are in the party.

Applying a percent premium for grouped PCs would help reward adventuring in parties, but what constitutes a group? Should a dynamic duo of spawn-point stalkers attain the full benefit? (it takes two to kite.. er... tango) Does a party start at 3? Four players seems like it becomes quite a bit rarer. When you get into a binary (bonus/no bonus) situation, it's a subtle OOC pressure to "recruit one more" to get the bonus cookie. We could make a sliding scale if there is a particular party size we'd like to encourage, but it'd have to diminish as well, or the theoretical 20-PC posse might become the next scourge of the Marches. (Exaggeration, but I think most of us who have experienced large-party combats know often half or more of the party doesn't even know what's going on, or have much chance to get a shot in). Maybe +15% at 2, +20% at 3, +30% at 4-6, 7-10 20%, 11+ 15%? Just tossing out ideas.

This said, without any kind of canon basis for "teamwork synergy" bonuses to XP, it would be a question of whether the perceived benefit (encouraging teaming up to fight spawns) justifies a break with PnP rules. I've never been a big fan of the DM-less "fight things for XP/loot" model, as there are a thousand other games people can play for that sort of entertainment which all likely have a better interface for it. When combat does occurs in game, for IC reasons, I'd like to see an equitable means of reward present; I'd just rather not see it become the Default Path to Success, as it just seems to cheapen the overall game experience in my view.

On the NWN1 vs NWN2 comparison, the NWN1-ALFA servers had built in Dimrets ("Diminishing Returns", for the unintiated), but I don't think it was properly implemented on any of the servers I was ever involved with (I certainly didn't, and still don't, know how to set it up as originally intended). It was supposed to diminish rewards by spawn point, so it would only penalize players who keep coming back to the same spot- in order to work though, it needed special unique identifiers for each and every spawn point which were tracked persistently for each PC, so it would know how far to tune down the XP based on how many times it had been hit by that character. If the ID numebers weren't defined, then the system figured it was spawn point number "0", and boy, there were a lot of spawn point 0's spread across ALFA. So, NWN1-ALFA combat XP was basically broken by the time I got my start here, but broken in such a way that it wasn't too easily exploited, so people got used to it.

The NWN2-ACR system certainly awards much more than NWN1-ALFA combat did, and does not currently involve a dimrets aspect, as the intent was to build servers from the ground up without repeating the same formulas of frequently-respawning invariant mobs which could be mowed through on a wristwatch schedule (or just tended to after server resets) by a player so inclined. For what it's worth, I expect we'll see the spawn density and predictability decrease as time goes on- one can look to the wilds of the OAS2 for some examples. There is a lot of randomizing we can do with our spawn system that we haven't had a chance to put to good use yet.

While it wouldn't really hurt my in-game experience if we dropped scripted combat XP altogether, I don't think it would discourage farming- those who were so inclined would still follow the same patterns to earn gold/loot, I suspect. If we removed that as well... it's not a good path to go down. I am not so zealous as to presume any non-DM'ed, non-static-quest combat is "farming"- I've had my share of meaningful, in-character encounters with random spawn groups and with known mob camps- it only becomes a frustration when "IC reasons" to go out and raid/fight/"scout" start to crop up night after night. I'd guess different people draw the line at different places for when it's good IC play, and when it's a thinly veiled XP/loot circuit.

I'd hope we can find a happy medium that satisfies the majority.

[Joebri]

Option D, remove combat XP.

I remember playing NWN1 and there were two groups of thought years ago too. Some really were able to get a lot of DM time and had no problems finding various forms of adventures or plots.

Those that had to resort to statics and the occasional thrill of just being online with another player had a different perspective, like me.

There were some who thought we should just roleplay and forget about xp altogether.

Conquest, loot, advancement and the associated drama is what built this genre of game to begin with - starting with PnP. It really is a small group of people who enjoy sitting around and roleplaying at a table in town for weeks on end.

Most roleplay fanatics like the combination of adventuring/roleplaying - so there has to be some way to advance and find adventure on your own because the DMs are working as hard as they can.

In a perfect world, there would always be a DM following groups around, then no static xp ideas would workout just fine.

[ThinkTank]

Multilevel XP lag is annoying and a waste of time, I have studiously ignored it throughout my entire D&D playing.

[witch]

Im for the even divide. regardless of levels.

Giving more exp to lower levels in a party will likely be seen as a chance to pimp low levels by higher powers.

Giving more exp to higher levels in a part results in low levels not getting what thye should and making it only more interesting for high levels to team up wiht low levels and even creating more a gap between levels

[AcadiusLost]

It is important to realize that with the "even split" idea, while it seems appealing to anyone on the lower side of the level curve- on the flip side of things, a higher-level PC would have to accept that partying up with even a single first-level PC is going to cut their XP gain in half. Bring along two or three understudies, and you're going to be passing along most of the XP earned, despite presumably doing more than your share of the fighting. Great for generous high-level souls, but less magnanimous players may be a lot less willing to share, since the "relative cost" of partying up becomes much higher, relatively speaking. Add that everyone lower in level wants you to share the XP love, and you've got the makings for an ugly OOC stigmatization of anyone who might have reasons (IC or OOC) not to party up casually.

The pessimist in me also worries that were the "even split" idea to come to fruition, "Hey, I party with lower levels all the time" might be used as an unimpeachable excuse for combat-grinding behavior that would otherwise be considered farming. A bit absurd, but it wouldn't be the first time token good-behaviourism has been used as a smokescreen in a place like ALFA.

[psycho_leo]

The pessimist in me also worries that were the "even split" idea to come to fruition, "Hey, I party with lower levels all the time" might be used as an unimpeachable excuse for combat-grinding behavior that would otherwise be considered farming. A bit absurd, but it wouldn't be the first time token good-behaviourism has been used as a smokescreen in a place like ALFA.

Well, people come up with all sorts of excuses to justify IG misbehaviour. It's up to the DMs and the PA to accept those excuses or not. For instance, there will always be the "but... but... I can't find a DM" excuse or the equally famous " It's IC for me cuz orcs killed mommy and daddy!" excuse for farming the same spots every night and as far as I'm aware, those aren't acceptable either.

And as for leaving a bitter taste in the mouths of the higher level players... there's always the very much IC matter of loot splitting. "I killed two times more orcs than you. I deserve a larger share".

Besides.. what goes around comes around. One day those higher lvl toons might die or get retired and their players would benefit from even splitting with their new PCs.

[Magonushi]

The division is just by relative level- there should be no single kill in which a PC gets more than 4x as much XP as another party member, unless PC A actually has 4x as many levels. 60 xp between a 2nd and 3rd level PC is 24xp/36xp etc.

And that is exactly my problem with the math. We were 2, 2, and 3 and the thrid level got 2-5 times as much XP. I would want a 28%, 28%, 44% split as you suggested earlier. But the system currently doesn't do that.

Maybe this is just a bug then.

[Twin Axes]

If this has been going on across the board for everyone then it is pretty frustrating. Since we have had XP deducted for accidentally having been rewarded twice for static quests, we ought to in turn be compensated for this loss of XP while risking the life and limb of our beloved characters.

Unfairness is a charged issue.

[psycho_leo]

Since we have had XP deducted for accidentally having been rewarded twice for static quests, we ought to in turn be compensated for this loss of XP while risking the life and limb of our beloved characters.

Unfairness is a charged issue.

Uh... we have been rewarded for risking the lives of our characters. Just that in some cases we've been rewarded two.. or even three times. Removing the XP gained through a bug (and it was nothing more than that) was fair if nothing else, since the players that did those statics after the fix would only get their due reward.

While arguing for a better system when it comes for combat XP split is valid, claiming compensation for the removal of bugged XP is not a valid argument and it's unlikely to get you anywhere.

[AcadiusLost]

As the ACR logs combat XP gains by PC and time for each kill, it wouldn't be hard to get some confirmation if something really is going haywire to the tune of a higherlevel getting 5x more XP. All we'd need is a time/date (EDT please) when some supposedly unbalanced combat XP went down, and it could be checked.

Volunteers?

[Twin Axes]

Uh... we have been rewarded for risking the lives of our characters. Just that in some cases we've been rewarded two.. or even three times. Removing the XP gained through a bug (and it was nothing more than that) was fair if nothing else, since the players that did those statics after the fix would only get their due reward.

While arguing for a better system when it comes for combat XP split is valid, claiming compensation for the removal of bugged XP is not a valid argument and it's unlikely to get you anywhere.

That's not what I meant. Maybe I wasn't clear enough. I'm not saying that we should be compensated for the removed XP. I'm not talking about the static rewards at all. I agree that the bugged XP should be removed, I have no bone with that.

What I am saying is that if we are diligent in removing illegal XP then we should also make sure that people aren't rewarded less than they deserve, which seems to have been the case in terms of combat XP.

What is frustrating here, as has been pointed out by others already, is the fact that adventuring with other PCs who have been lucky enough to experience DM attention and thus have been able to advance in levels, unlike me and many others, has penalised less fortunate PCs in terms of XP, and made it even harder to catch up, if this bugged dividing of XP that Magonushi pointed out has been going on.

[Sintaqx]

As the ACR logs combat XP gains by PC and time for each kill, it wouldn't be hard to get some confirmation if something really is going haywire to the tune of a higherlevel getting 5x more XP. All we'd need is a time/date (EDT please) when some supposedly unbalanced combat XP went down, and it could be checked.

Volunteers?

I'll send a pm with times and party configurations/members next time I see some small group combat.

[paazin]

As the ACR logs combat XP gains by PC and time for each kill, it wouldn't be hard to get some confirmation if something really is going haywire to the tune of a higherlevel getting 5x more XP. All we'd need is a time/date (EDT please) when some supposedly unbalanced combat XP went down, and it could be checked.

Volunteers?

After parsing through the logs, it appears that the XP gain was as intended, namely 2:2:3 with two level 2s and a 3, then 2:2:4 with two level 2s and a 4.

I'm not sure if there might be other factors at work here (something adjusting XP on the receiving end?), but that's what's written in the logs.

[Zelknolf]

A thought--

Perhaps we could divide up combat XP on a conditional setup.

If there's a DM on and in the area (definately checkable), award more XP to the lower level members of the party.

If the members of the party are within 2 levels of each other, give an even split of XP.

If the members of the party are 3 or more levels apart, return to the old system, but give the lower level PCs a little bonus nudge for having a killing blow. (exact quantity of said nudge up for debate, but I would think that ideally, lowbie XP > highbie XP for those things the lowbie kills.)


As I see it, in the first case, those monsters are 99% likely to be spawned or managed by the DM. Those players are probably going go get some DM XP at the end of the session, and I'd even bet that those characters are going to work together on a fairly consistent basis. It behooves the party to try to catch up that one low-level PC and we don't have to worry about incentives to the high levels, because getting DMed is the strongest incentive ALFA has.

In the second case, you're damn close to an even party there. If a player is really stressing out about being the level 3 in a party of level 4s, said player can play more for a bit to try to make up the 3k XP of difference. (it'd take time, and it seems like 1 or 2 levels of difference is silly to stress over, but meh -- you're close enough that it seems like a realistic option to me at that point.)

In the third case, we're probably looking at a high level taking a low level out to "train," in some sense of the phrase. Those high levels can do it how they like/how they think is IC. Some might take up their trusty rusty dagger, turn on expertise, and keep some angry bad guys at bay while a lower level gets some crossbow practice. It's still real combat and real danger for that lowbie here, just with a tankier fellow who seems likely to bust out the bandages if those monsters take him down. Some might decide that the way to go is for that highbie to just plow through as many hostile things as possible, and let that lowbie kill what he/she kills. I think the lowbie deserves credit when this works out (hey, every once in a while, a level 1 with a crossbow will crit something dangerous and get a kill) but for the most part, thie highbie is doing the work, and the highbie aught to get the appropriate XP for it. In this case, the highbies have an incentive if they want it (use the good weapons/spells and make some carnage) or they can try to nurture their friendly newbie if they want to (load said newbie with buffs, give him a crossbow and a pat on the helmet, then go to distract some goblins).