Giving Experience Points for killing

[drewkitty ~..~]

dependeds on how free you are witht he exp. if you count the whole group as the minior menise then only 25. If each Goblin as a minor menise, then 25 exp each devided between those who helped deffeat them. (if only two of the chars did the fighting then only those two chars would get the exp, not the char that stay out of the fight)

[Killer Cyborg]

I have a question, in the experience point table it lists "Killing a minor/major/great menace";
now does that count for every actual body killed?
Example: my party faces 6 dull witted goblins and defeats them, do I count the 6 goblins as a "minor menace" and give them 25 XPs, or do I count all 6 goblins as a minor menace and give them 150 (25x6) XPs?

Go by overall encounter, not individual creature.

Otherwise killing a swarm of killer bees can get you several levels in one battle.

[The Beast]

I'd like to point out that the xp points say killing or subduing. So captures and retreats count for xp as well.

[Jesterzzn]

XP in Rifts is purely subjective. GM's have to think ahead of time how they are going to alot XP.

I always had the players keep track on their own every time they use a skill or what actions they take during an encounter. I tried to keep track of whenever I thought someone did something XP worthy outside of the basics such as oraganizing an attack plan or issuing commands that help the group. Things like that.

I view the final kill XP as the encounter bonus. The actual encounter might have seen each player use several skills, have a few nifty ideas that didn't pan out for whatever reason (typically dice related), have a couple nifty ideas that led to their victory, all of which can result in XP for their individual characters. Then, once the combat is resolved and should they be victors they would all get the encounter bonus.

[Khanibal]

If you have a group of 1st level lightly armed/armored adventures who defeat a group of 6 goblins who have basically enslaved a village, each one might be a medium or major menace. If your group of 12th level hatchlings and demigods stop and wipe out 6 goblins while on their way to give a Yama King a pink-belly, the gobins MIGHT count as a minor menace for the whole group.

[Tinker Dragoon]

This message has been moved to the GM's Forum, where the topic is more applicable and appropriate. If you have a problem with how this post was handled please direct all inquires to deific.nmi@gmail.com, including the url to the post in question.

[Noon]

XP in Rifts is purely subjective. GM's have to think ahead of time how they are going to alot XP.

Aye. The original question is kind of like asking whether you should multiple or divide a number that's entirely made up by you. It doesn't really matter what you do with it after, since you just chose it to begin with.

[demos606]

I have a question, in the experience point table it lists "Killing a minor/major/great menace";
now does that count for every actual body killed?
Example: my party faces 6 dull witted goblins and defeats them, do I count the 6 goblins as a "minor menace" and give them 25 XPs, or do I count all 6 goblins as a minor menace and give them 150 (25x6) XPs?

It depends really. If as individuals the goblins wouldn't be so much as a nuisance, you'd award once for the group. If as individuals the goblins are dangerous enough to be a threat, you might be nice and give the individual award instead of the group. If as a group they're tactically more dangerous than the individual would be, say there's a Witch and a LLW in the goblin group, I'd award once at the higher group threat level.

[Jesterzzn]

However, if the exp were entirely made up by us there wouldn't be charts for it. It's not whose line is it anyways where its a grab bag of points that don't matter for anything.

I really don't think that level of variance was even implied. But I would like to make mention that the usefulness of the XP charts is limited entirely to the consistancy of the GM. When the method and frequency of the XP rewards is left to judgement of one person, the charts are really only there as a countdown timer on advancement. Since the XP rewards are subjective, so too are the level plateaus. In one GMs game it might be a major difference in two XP charts as far as how long it takes to level. In another game, those extra 500-1000XP might only take an extra game session or two.

I prefer it when XP is more gradually atained, but I've met people that refuse to play in games where they don't level up at least every other session.

The Palladium XP system supports both styles.

[Noon]

XP in Rifts is purely subjective. GM's have to think ahead of time how they are going to alot XP.

Aye. The original question is kind of like asking whether you should multiple or divide a number that's entirely made up by you. It doesn't really matter what you do with it after, since you just chose it to begin with.

Yes and no. You have to decide how frequently you will allow them to get the points, whether they get kill points for an encounter or per monster, whether they get skill points for using spells and whatnot, whether you adjust the xp bonuses because your group every meets once every two weeks and you want to keep it feeling progressive, and a variety of other things. However, if the exp were entirely made up by us there wouldn't be charts for it. It's not whose line is it anyways where its a grab bag of points that don't matter for anything.

Well, I'd say you've been tricked. Take this example
1. You get whatever XP the GM thinks you should have.
2. You get 50 XP for a hard opponent.

They are exactly the same! What is 'hard'? How long is a piece of string?

The term 'hard' means nothing, your just making it up. Which means the players get as much XP as the GM thinks they should have. Number 2 may as well read "You get 50 XP for a X opponent". What is the value of X? Well, you just plug one in - you make it up.

What if you were paid this way in real life? "You get $50 for a 'hard' job".

But if you think that isn't made up and 'works', what can I say? I think your easily manipulatable, even when it comes to your real life income. I'm not saying that to be mean - it's out of friendly concern.

I think it is like who's line is it anyway - it's just using a bit of illusionism to cover that up. Like when a GM makes you think you decided to go left, when really he rigged it so you'd go left. Same here - the term 'hard' tricks you into just making something up, but leaves you thinking your following a system.

[Khanibal]

However, if the exp were entirely made up by us there wouldn't be charts for it. It's not whose line is it anyways where its a grab bag of points that don't matter for anything.

I really don't think that level of variance was even implied. But I would like to make mention that the usefulness of the XP charts is limited entirely to the consistancy of the GM. When the method and frequency of the XP rewards is left to judgement of one person, the charts are really only there as a countdown timer on advancement. Since the XP rewards are subjective, so too are the level plateaus. In one GMs game it might be a major difference in two XP charts as far as how long it takes to level. In another game, those extra 500-1000XP might only take an extra game session or two.

I prefer it when XP is more gradually atained, but I've met people that refuse to play in games where they don't level up at least every other session.

The Palladium XP system supports both styles.

I'd let you get away with shafting me on XP, as long as the story moves along and we don't get to the "OMG, we're facing the Vampire Intelligence and we're only 5th level!" stage. Usually, this is where the super-NPCs role in and save the day. Not that I'm accusing you, but I've been there before...
I still have the dreams