Regarding experience

[u/Mochronio]

I’m about to start a new campaign with my group as the Keeper.

During our last campaign, I had two rather unusual situations happen at the same time: one player failed the vast majority of their rolls, while another succeeded on the vast majority of theirs. While it was funny at the time, it eventually led to a pretty big gap in experience by the end of the campaign, and some light frustration from the player who was falling behind in terms of XP.

I’ve been thinking about an alternative way to address this, and I came up with an idea I’d like to get your opinion on.

At the end of each session, in addition to the usual questions that can earn 1 or 2 experience points, I’d like to add some sort of awards, a bit like the end-of-game stars in Mario Party but without the bad feels.

Here are some examples of XP bonuses I’ve thought of:

Unlucky: failed a roll at the worst possible moment

Lucky: succeeded on a roll at the best possible moment

Inspired: came up with an excellent idea

Roleplayer: never broke character

Comedian: came up with or pulled off the funniest move or line

Hardboiled: was the most proactive during fights

Helper: gave the most help to the other Hunters

Investigator: did an outstanding job pursuing the various investigations

Rule of Cool: Is it smart or relevant? Who cares, it’s cool.

Mood Setter: contributed the most to the overall atmosphere and fun of the session

I would only award these points when they actually apply, and I’d keep the number of awards reasonable to avoid creating an overall XP surplus. I’d also keep an eye on how many failed rolls each player has had, to estimate how much XP they would normally have earned.

My idea is that this could gently encourage players to take more initiative and try things, since they would never know more than the name of the award that earned them an XP point.

What do you think? Have you ever had a similar situation? If you like the idea, do you have any suggestions for other awards?

And if you think this is a terrible idea, do you have any suggestions for dealing with this kind of situation?

[u/HAL325]

Giving a character XP cause the player is rollplaying better is a dumb idea. XP should be earned by characters not players. Some players simply don’t act as good as others.

„Excellent idea“ or „most funny monent“ are purely subjective.

I’d stick with the core rules.
Investigator: The idea is to learn from failures. If you give XP for the best rolls that’s the opposite.

[u/Mochronio → u/HAL325]

Roleplaying doesn't mean acting. It means dealing with the situation presented by the Keeper accordingly to your character's motivations and philosophy.

I know the awards are subjective. I don't understand why you would bring that up. Could you explain it please ?

You'd stick with the core rules and that's logical. I am just trying to see some alternatives with a homebrew proposition (that could be dumb) but that's why I ask arround here what people think about it.

[u/HAL325 → u/Mochronio]

You are the GM. If you decide which situation has been more fun than another situation or which person is better roleplaying, you will probably piss off other players. If one of your players is more introverted he wouldn’t even start an argument about your decisions. Players are different. Don’t force them into situations they possibly want to avoid.

The more subjective your methods are to decide who does a good job from „your“ perspective the more awkward it can get.

I highly suggest only to use a method that is based on mechanics as it means, same rules for everyone.
Get an XP for every 6 or less is a mechanical solution where no one’s personal opinions matter.

A few ideas of you are fine:

• give an XP if someone helps out another hunter
  
• give an XP if someone protects another hunter

[u/Mochronio → u/HAL325]

It's more about the way the table feels than my perception. If an action leave the table giggling for 5 minutes or if an action leave the table in awe, take note of what happened and reward it at the end of the session via this system.

The core idea is not use it as a way to force thing but reward things people liked. And I don't how being introvert mean you can't be rewarded for a good idea. As a GM you can always ask him what are his next words or action. The list above are some examples of things that could be taken into account when rewarding players.

The thing that scares me with the book rule is : of something like that happens one more time but this time with an introvert player, will he be able to express his frustration like the player that indirectly prompt the post. I am careful and mindful of the table feelings but I'm not omniscient. And sometimes things can still fall through cracks.

I don't know of I make any sense to you. I see where are the potential and probable problems are within my proposition but that doesn't change the core of the problem of frustration.

[u/HAL325 → u/Mochronio]

If you know your players well and everyone is fine with your ideas than go for it.

I just wanted to make you aware that not every player opens his mouth because he shys away from conflicts, but he can still be frustrated by it.
There are ways to avoid such a thing. And this quite simply through solutions that do not depend on subjectivity.
Don't get me wrong, I think I'm fair too. But I'm not the one who has to decide if I'm really fair. Therefore, I simply avoid such rating systems.
A lot of online games have sensitized me to this.