Do you award out of play XP?

[The Oh So Amazing Nate]

The game I'm in now, despite my years of gaming, is the first time I've ever had to calculate/keep track of XP. Before now it always went, "you survived. congratulations, you level up and get X amount of loot." Needless to say I'm really inexperienced at knowing how actions are rewarded (so is the GM, so we collaborate). Which leads me to my ?. Do you award PC's XP for out of play actions? Let me explain.

This is how it happened:

GM has a Pc in the game that he routinely separates from the group as he thinks it's hard to play and be GM at the same time (privileged information and all that). This has resulted in the GM's PC being around 2 1/2 levels behind the rest of the group. So the GM got his PC a job (where he uses his cooking skill) while I was out trying to off load some stolen loot.

After the game we were totaling up XP and I asked the GM how many times he used his skill while at work. He had no idea as he'd never worked food service before and couldn't figure how to calculate something like that. So I did some quick math based on my experience and plugged the #'s into a random dice roller, multiplied the numbers it came up with by 25 (using a skill successful or not) and the result was... 3550 XP points

Now while I had no problem with his PC leveling up (puts him on par with the group.), I was shocked at the # of points earned out of play. My Pc was out risking his life and a serious prison sentence if things went badly and only earning a few hundred XP. The GM was in no danger at all and earned a TON of XP. On the upside, I made more money in one transaction than his PC will all year with his job lol.

How do you guy's do it?

[Killer Cyborg]

I've actually done that before, once, but the PC in question was well behind the rest of the party level-wise, so it didn't throw anything out of whack.
Also, in hindsight, I was probably wrong.

If people got 25 XP every time they used ANY skill in ANY way, then people would level up all the time.
Because they speak their native language frequently.
And they use basic math about as much.

So it's safe to say that's not exactly how things work.

How do things work, then?
Well, we know that you only have to roll skill checks when it's important or interesting, and when the character is facing some kind of challenge.
And I think that it's safe to say that the 100th time you make bulk Mac & Cheese for a buffet line, it's not going to be that important, interesting, or challenging.
It'd be one of those times that you don't even need to roll a skill check.
And if you don't need to roll a skill check, I think it's safe to say that you don't get the XP from using the skill.

Basically, his estimation was off. As far as XP is concerned, he probably only used his skill a handful of times.

[The Oh So Amazing Nate]

PC was only level one. everything is a challenge at level one. Everyone else was pushing level four. Only when it's important, challenging, or interesting hmmmm. Interesting way at looking at things. we've been rolling like madmen and suffering for our bad rolls.

yeah I thought the number was pretty high. but at least we're all the same level now. don't have to keep bailing him out of trouble in combat.

[MaxxSterling]

I never felt levels meant that much in this game, unless you're a caster? Why even bother explaining it, if it's the GM's character who only comes into play occasionally, just level it up when you need to...

[Noon]

Oh, but if you have special gamer reading abilities you can understand... just joking!

Yeah, the way it's written, yeah, it works out the way you describe it.

Myself, I highly suspect the author would not run it that way. Upon this suspicion, I run it this way - if the GM asks you to roll, you get XP. Otherwise you just pass at the activity you're doing. It's like an old version of 'say yes or roll'.

I wouldn't let a guy level up by skill rolls at some routine job (unless the game was about living routine lives). By simply not asking for rolls for it. If somehow it came to the point that a villian would kill innocents if he didn't make a really nice omlette, then I'd have him roll. Because it matters to the sort of subject matter gameplay revolves around (villains, life & death, survival, etc).

Beware your GM isn't going through the first stages of GMPC syndrome, where he suddenly starts to see a whole bunch of nice things that yeah, he could totally see this PC (which just happens to be his) getting. Usually GM's skip having a PC, simply to avoid the risk of such temptation.

To continue playing I'd suggest having a talk about XP and how it's gained - perhaps some extra catch up XP (from being around more experienced professionals) for the lower level character. I would avoid out of play XP.

[The Oh So Amazing Nate]

Oh, but if you have special gamer reading abilities you can understand... just joking!

Yeah, the way it's written, yeah, it works out the way you describe it.

Myself, I highly suspect the author would not run it that way. Upon this suspicion, I run it this way - if the GM asks you to roll, you get XP. Otherwise you just pass at the activity you're doing. It's like an old version of 'say yes or roll'.

I wouldn't let a guy level up by skill rolls at some routine job (unless the game was about living routine lives). By simply not asking for rolls for it. If somehow it came to the point that a villian would kill innocents if he didn't make a really nice omlette, then I'd have him roll. Because it matters to the sort of subject matter gameplay revolves around (villains, life & death, survival, etc).

Valid points.

Beware your GM isn't going through the first stages of GMPC syndrome, where he suddenly starts to see a whole bunch of nice things that yeah, he could totally see this PC (which just happens to be his) getting. Usually GM's skip having a PC, simply to avoid the risk of such temptation.

Oh yes! The nice thing that he could totally see his PC getting..Is to stay alive.

To continue playing I'd suggest having a talk about XP and how it's gained - perhaps some extra catch up XP (from being around more experienced professionals) for the lower level character. I would avoid out of play XP.

will show him these posts and go from there.

[Killer Cyborg]

PC was only level one. everything is a challenge at level one.

Not literally everything.
Again, if you got XP every time you used a skill, people would constantly level up just from speaking their native language.
Cashiers would hit level 15, just from using Basic Math to count change.

Everyone else was pushing level four.

Hey, if you want to boost him up, boost him up.

Only when it's important, challenging, or interesting hmmmm. Interesting way at looking at things. we've been rolling like madmen and suffering for our bad rolls.

It's obscurely placed, but it's official:

The Collected MOPs, p. 115
How do you roll against one of your skills to find out if it succeeded or not?
The simple answer is that you roll a percentile. A result under your skill level means your character succeeds at whatever is being attempted. Rolling a number above the skill level means that the attempt failed.
However, you don't roll all the time. You only roll when the character is facing some kind of challenge or [i]difficulty[/u]. For example, let's say that Night Beast is planning to drive a car he's never driven before, say the latest luxury care from Detroit.
There are two possible situations.
In the first, the car is parked in an empty parking lot on a Sunday evening, he's got all the time in the world, and he can take a few minutes getting used to the controls, and then test driving the car around the parking lot. Does he have to roll? No! He already knows pilot: automobile, so he just has to spend a minute or two to get the feel of that particular car. Many cars have a different feel to them. If you're used to driving a big car, jeep, truck, or van, there is a moment of disorientation when one drives a smaller care because the vehicle is much smaller and lower to the ground.
However, what if Night Beast is in hot pursuit of some bank robbers? He runs out of the bank and spots a friend of his. "Here, take my car," says the friend, tossing Beastie the keys. Same new luxury car, but now Night Beast is trying to operate a totally strange vehicle in a big hurry. In this case, he might need to roll to start the car, another roll to drive it successfully, and perhaps a few more rolls during the pursuit, particularly when trying to make a special move, like a sudden turn.
Likewise, Night Beast driving his usual vehicle, in normal traffic, at regular speeds, will never have to roll against his skill.

[Noon]

Beware your GM isn't going through the first stages of GMPC syndrome, where he suddenly starts to see a whole bunch of nice things that yeah, he could totally see this PC (which just happens to be his) getting. Usually GM's skip having a PC, simply to avoid the risk of such temptation.

Oh yes! The nice thing that he could totally see his PC getting..Is to stay alive.

Well, yes, that is a problem if staying alive is not a right but something earnt. You mentioned your PC being out risking his life - I took you at your word on that. So if you are risking your PC's life, why does the GM get to totally see his PC getting to stay alive?

If your group makes an exception for the GMPC and his is a right to survival, okay. I didn't know that - no one can second guess every arrangement your group might have.

[St. Evil]

No I do not, not in the way you describe. The GM did what the GM did and I would not have done it the same way. I have always used GM fiat for my NPC's. About the most "honest" I am w/ GMPC's is something I am just trying out now, where I will have several different GMPC's one each in a separate chapter of my story. The XP will go from one to another to keep game balance. This kills two birds w/one stone, for the campaign I am running. 1. Since I do not get to play PFRPG, I get to have first hand XP playing different OCCS & races. Selfish I know. 2. It avoids the group from stagnating, hopefully new tactics, and player dynamics w/ a new GMPC, who will help the plot along.

[The Oh So Amazing Nate]

Interesting points everyone. Thank you for chiming in. As I mentioned at the beginning, I'm new to keeping track of/being awarded XP and the GM is new to Palladium in general (AD&D 2e. which only awards points for defeating enemies and collecting loot). We're figuring this out as we go along.

Ultimately - If your not generous with the XP, the players will not likely hit even 5th level after 6+ years of playing.

Yikes! We've only been playing these PC's a couple months and we're well on our way to level 4. If we kept them at lower levels because of stingy XP awards they would A. be looong dead by now. and B. very very boring in their futility against even normal odds. As it is we've already lost one character (a mutant hamster KGB intelligence analyst) to some really weak zombies. I had to put the furry little guy down myself after he reanimated.

[Killer Cyborg]

Interesting points everyone. Thank you for chiming in. As I mentioned at the beginning, I'm new to keeping track of/being awarded XP and the GM is new to Palladium in general (AD&D 2e. which only awards points for defeating enemies and collecting loot). We're figuring this out as we go along.

Ultimately - If your not generous with the XP, the players will not likely hit even 5th level after 6+ years of playing.

Yikes! We've only been playing these PC's a couple months and we're well on our way to level 4. If we kept them at lower levels because of stingy XP awards they would A. be looong dead by now. and B. very very boring in their futility against even normal odds. As it is we've already lost one character (a mutant hamster KGB intelligence analyst) to some really weak zombies. I had to put the furry little guy down myself after he reanimated.

The Palladium system was designed back when 1st edition AD&D (and/or Basic) was the standard, and that means that it has an old-school progression rate.
Back then, if you got your character up to 10th level, it meant something.
Maybe not anything important, but it was a pretty big accomplishment.

These days, people expect to max out their character level at some point, or at least come close, but that's just not how Palladium designed their system.

The upside of Rifts, though, is that very often level advancement is only a minor part of the character.
A 15th level Grunt isn't necessarily that much harder to kill than a 1st level Grunt, if they've got the same equipment and such.
A 5th level mage with the right gear and/or special features can be just as powerful as a 10th level mage without those features.

So the lack of fast level advancement never really bothered me.

That being said, I can certainly see the appeal of faster leveling.
If you want to do things that way, I really recommend skipping XP entirely, and just going back to the "every once in a while, the GM tells you that you've leveled up" style of running things.
Because the XP tables in the book are designed for slow progression which grinds to a virtual standstill at higher levels, and while they CAN be modified and/or house-ruled into allowing for faster level progression, it'd be quite a bit of work just to net out essentially the same as just handing out levels as needed.

[The Oh So Amazing Nate]

I was about to ask why everyone thinks I'm we're playing Rifts. Then my brain kicked in with it's the only line Palladium is keeping current and therefore the one on everyone's mind, unless you post in a specific forum.

We're not playing Rifts. We're playing TMNT&OS. In Rifts I can see your point as to how leveling up is kind of irrelevant depending on gear/equipment. In TMNT I don't think it plays out like that. A level 5 (oh let's just use) Ninja (because there's better than a 40% chance of being one) is gonna beat the snot out of a level 1 Ninja. More APM, bonuses to strike HtH, bonuses to strike with WP, and a higher chance of success at skill rolls means the L5 Ninja is more likely to sneak up behind you and cut your throat and be gone before you even feel the cut.

Looking at the level progression chart, yes, it does grind to a standstill at higher levels due to the sheer # of points you have to earn.

[Killer Cyborg]

I was about to ask why everyone thinks I'm we're playing Rifts. Then my brain kicked in with it's the only line Palladium is keeping current and therefore the one on everyone's mind, unless you post in a specific forum.

We're not playing Rifts. We're playing TMNT&OS. In Rifts I can see your point as to how leveling up is kind of irrelevant depending on gear/equipment. In TMNT I don't think it plays out like that. A level 5 (oh let's just use) Ninja (because there's better than a 40% chance of being one) is gonna beat the snot out of a level 1 Ninja. More APM, bonuses to strike HtH, bonuses to strike with WP, and a higher chance of success at skill rolls means the L5 Ninja is more likely to sneak up behind you and cut your throat and be gone before you even feel the cut.

Looking at the level progression chart, yes, it does grind to a standstill at higher levels due to the sheer # of points you have to earn.

Thanks for the clarification!

I tend to assume that everything is Rifts, because that's what I play as a rule. I use everything else as a supplement.

I'd say that the same principle applies to a much lesser extent with TMNT: very often how you create your character is more important than what level you are... but only at lower levels, unlike with Rifts.
So there would be more reason to modify the system if you want faster leveling, because as you say, leveling matters a heck of a lot more than in Rifts.
In which case, I again come to my same conclusion: you may well be better off just handing out levels as desired, rather than tracking XP.

With TMNT, though, you have the potential for other rewards that Rifts generally does not offer: you could work in a way for characters to gain Bio-E points as they progress, if for some reason you wish to stick to the official leveling/xp charts, but wish to offer more regular rewards for your characters.
You could do this via variations on the machine presented in TMNT Adventures, or via magic, time-travel or Temporal Energy (ala Transdimensional TMNT), or simple GM fiat.
This might add to player satisfaction, as it can be frustrating to have to compromise during character creation, often coming up with a character that is really kick-ass... but only 3' tall.
This way, the characters can evolve in power independent of XP rewards and leveling.
Although I have no idea how well this would work out, as I've never tried it.

[The Dark Elf]

How we play it-

Any characters controlled by the GM is an NPC. Never a player character even if it once was a PC previously. So that character gets zero xp and stays at whatever level he was unless he is a permanent NPC and then the GM can do whatever he wishes.

If a player does something menial for ages (like work a kitchen for eight hours) I would give him 25 xp for using a skill just once to see how his shift went. However; IF the rest of the group were heavily involved in lots of action during this time and clocking up some serious xp I would periodically come back to the chef as if he were in any other situation and see how he is doing. I would play out his scenario the same as if he was on a dungeon crawl or storming a military base - make him roll skills for success and take actions and receive consequences.

e.g.-

"So you roll to cook. You failed your skill roll and the meal looks unfit for a sewer rat. A call from service waiter says that they need that order straight away!" (Does he choose to serve it anyway?) If so- "You serve it up and cross your fingers. A few moments later you hear a spluttering from a table in the restaurant and the sound of someone vomitting! The waiter enters the kitchen pushing the door wide open and asks "What the hell was in that dish?!" Through the door you see a finely suited man bent over his chair throwing up onto the floor. "Pierre LaFruce! The famous food critic!" squeals the head chef. The diners at the next table clutch at their mouths as the sight is too much for them and they too throw up into their plates. The whole restaurant erupts in nausea as the head chef walks over to you with the carving knife clutched in his hand! - Roll initiative....."

[Zamion138]

Id only allow one skill roll per shift xp wise, other wise as some one stated at lv1 your making alot horrid dish and going to get fired. If only 40 % of your meals are good then your a terrible line cook!
If your using crazy ingeridents and doing melicural gastronomic creations sure roll your %. To cook a burger? No.
Your cooking for a king or crime boss yeah do your roll.
Also how is your ninjitsu and wp: pistol getting better if all you did was cook? Skill xp is to be part of your chars rounding out how you leveled up to make it more than a combat based xp system. I wouldnt allow an all skill based leveling unless you were the resercher occ or the like.

[The Oh So Amazing Nate]

e.g.-

"So you roll to cook. You failed your skill roll and the meal looks unfit for a sewer rat. A call from service waiter says that they need that order straight away!" (Does he choose to serve it anyway?) If so- "You serve it up and cross your fingers. A few moments later you hear a spluttering from a table in the restaurant and the sound of someone vomitting! The waiter enters the kitchen pushing the door wide open and asks "What the hell was in that dish?!" Through the door you see a finely suited man bent over his chair throwing up onto the floor. "Pierre LaFruce! The famous food critic!" squeals the head chef. The diners at the next table clutch at their mouths as the sight is too much for them and they too throw up into their plates. The whole restaurant erupts in nausea as the head chef walks over to you with the carving knife clutched in his hand! - Roll initiative....."

This is F'ing Fantastic. I have tears in my eyes from laughing so hard.

[scottypotty]

I don't use the tables. If XP is given out, then I just give everyone the same lump sum. How much will depend on the group as well. Some people enjoy a faster advancement than others. My preference though is to keep track all of the XP myself. Then I'd award it depending on how well the player roleplayed their character and what they did. I prefer it this way so I can keep some characters from getting too far from the group. I believe it also helps players focus on the game rather than their next level.

Just try a few things and you'll find what works best for your group. Also, the GM shouldn't have a character. The guys I play with take turns rotating as GM and our characters kind of just go off and do their own thing somewhere else.

[The Oh So Amazing Nate]

Just try a few things and you'll find what works best for your group. Also, the GM shouldn't have a character. The guys I play with take turns rotating as GM and our characters kind of just go off and do their own thing somewhere else.

We played again tonight and tweaked the way we awarded points. We still took the points for using a skill (successful or not) but we didn't do it for EVERYTHING we did. By the end of the game I only ended up with 5 skill use awards = 125pts.

The biggest XP bonus I got was for playing in character. Determined that my mutant tiger hobo with partial speech sounds like Clint Eastwood with a throat full of phlegm.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXnEeNglN5g
+
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uD2CszHD1fU

I managed to keep it up the whole game, along with appropriate hobo responses for the villain knocking him down and spilling his entire box FULL ($120 worth) of donated, (closing time) leftover fancy shmancy seafood. That guy got a beating and a berating.

Never saw a GM laugh that hard.
PS I might have lost my voice my the morning but it was fun.

[The Dark Elf]

e.g.-

"So you roll to cook. You failed your skill roll and the meal looks unfit for a sewer rat. A call from service waiter says that they need that order straight away!" (Does he choose to serve it anyway?) If so- "You serve it up and cross your fingers. A few moments later you hear a spluttering from a table in the restaurant and the sound of someone vomitting! The waiter enters the kitchen pushing the door wide open and asks "What the hell was in that dish?!" Through the door you see a finely suited man bent over his chair throwing up onto the floor. "Pierre LaFruce! The famous food critic!" squeals the head chef. The diners at the next table clutch at their mouths as the sight is too much for them and they too throw up into their plates. The whole restaurant erupts in nausea as the head chef walks over to you with the carving knife clutched in his hand! - Roll initiative....."

This is F'ing Fantastic. I have tears in my eyes from laughing so hard.

Hope it helped.

[Spinachcat]

Say no to GMPCs. GMs have NPCs.

If the GM becomes a player in another GM's campaign, maybe he can bring one of his favorite NPCs into that campaign when he is playing.

[The Oh So Amazing Nate]

I can see your point behind no GMPC's, but honestly I've never played without one. At the point the group is me and the GM. When I'm by myself there are times I just don't follow what he's laying down and we both get frustrated that the game is stagnating or I'm totally overwhelmed by the random # of NPC's I have to fight.

[Noon]

Perhaps make it the GM PC can only be one level lower than your character. Don't increase his XP to do this, just his level. So if you are level 5, his PC is level 4.

And maybe the GM should consider just telling you where to follow, after X number of times you don't figure out what he's laying out that you are to follow?

Not that I'm a big fan of following games. But for playing that way, there's some advice.

[KillWatch]

I don't think I understand, the GM has a PC? Shouldn't that be an NPC? Do you trade out as GM?
If not, then what's the point? Who cares as long as he doesn't steal the show from the real PCs

[Dunia]

The only time I had had a character in a campaign that I GMed was when I after 2 years of GMing 1-2 times per week and was out of ideas and another of my players said that they could do a session or two.

So I made myself a little character at level 1 (the rest of the group was level 4). So I take this Vagabond who was a contact that one of the players had used back and forth in the campaign and was not fleshed out yet. This character got +20% xp after these two sessions to reflect that he does stuff when the others are out and playing and he is not.

After 2 times of playing, I am back in the GM chair. So I do not bother about adding more XP to this character when the player gets their, as he is not adventuring. Instead, the other GM said that this vagabod got a good dead when reselling his loot, so he could take into a luxurary hotel, got lots of good food for the first time in his life and enjoyed every minute of it. Then 3 months later, another player ask to be allowed to GM, so I reuse said vagabond, but instead of adding lots of XP, the new GM says that "You have been resting trading and repairing your equipment during this time. So I give you for this adventure a +10% on some skills, as well as full e-clips, repaired and upgraded your equipment. As well as You have the following jobs (adventure ideas) that your characer can do and let the other players tag along on, and you will get the standard +20 % bonus xp for this adventure.

That is how we do.

[ZorValachan]

I once came up with an out of session rate of EXP earning for when player PCs or GMPCs were not there for a game session. So they advanced a bit, but not comparable to those who actually were present in the adventure. I tweaked and refined this when I wrote my own fantasy based game. That was what my group did from 1986 to 2010.
In 2010, having much less free time to game, and everyone having families and more responsibilities, and upon reading the 4ed DMG, I decided to completely change the way I did things. Because life changed.

In teens and twenties, missing a game was mainly because of parties or situations that a person had control over. So the character was penalized EXP (or got a reduced rate) for not being in the session. But in my thirties, it seems harsh to penalize a guy who wants to game, but has to go to his daughter's school play, or his son's pinewood derby. Also, giving a character less EXP over time makes that character lower level. And the -group- can be considered penalized if some people are lower level. Half the group of level 5 and the other half level 2... depending on the game and system (as KC and TOSAN pointed out Rifts isn't as bad as TMNT) the group suffers because of it. So for the last 2 years I've just made everyone have the same EXP, and if they were not there, we come up with an interesting side-story.
There was a lot of head shaking, shock, and push back to begin with (because we just had not done that for decades), but after a few sessions everyone got on track and it works for us.