Awarding XP

[Weltengeist]

I was somewhat surprised that the rules propose to award XP on a "per adventure" basis. In my experience, an adventure can last anything from 3-30 hours and allow for a vast range of experiences (everything from "hardly learned anything new" up to "ground-shaking experiences that made you a different person altogether"). So I was wondering: What "size" of adventure were you thinking of when you proposed this rule?

[Clovis]

Well, the scenarios from Book 0 are good indicators of what a "standard" adventure should be: it lasts about 6 hours, the PCs are confronted with at least some measure of danger, and they learn something new (and even unsettling). If a gaming session runs long and if the PCs take the scenario to a new level (by trying to uproot a whole clan of bandits, instead of just driving back an attack from them, for example), then you can award them more XPs. Likewise, if the session lasted much less time than intended, and did not present as much danger as expected (because your Players botched the whole thing, or because they persistently avoided any possible confrontation), then this should imply a lesser reward in XPs.

Does that help?

[Weltengeist]

Does that help?

Yes. The "approx. 6 hours" answer was what I was fishing for. Multiplying by an appropriate factor is what I planned to do

Thx

Weltengeist

[tamsyn]

3 session scenario (loch Varn, poison) they got 20xp. 2 session (red fall) they got 15.

I'm maverick however

[Clovis]

Well, since these scenarios took a particularly long time for the Players to go through (as I seem to remember it did), that doesn't seem unjustified to me.

And at any rate, heck, everyone is free to do as they please. The charts given in the "Experience and Advancement" chapter are presented as a reference; not as a sacrosanct rule! Ultimately, every GM should do what rocks their and their PCs' boat.

[Valenae]

If your adventure takes more time try to divide it on chapters (or Tomes).