Can you earn endless XP using a Flameskull and its self-revival feature?












8












$begingroup$


If you defeat a creature like a flameskull (Monster Manual p.135):




Eldritch Rejuvenation. A flameskull's shattered fragments reform unless they are splashed with holy water or subjected to a dispel magic or remove curse
spell. If it can no longer fulfill its intended purpose, the re-formed flameskull is beholden to no one and becomes autonomous.



Rejuvenation. If the flameskull is destroyed, it regains all its hit points in 1 hour unless holy water is sprinkled on its remains or dispel magic or remove curse spell is cast on them.




And wait for an hour, then you kill it again, an wait another hour, and kill it again... would you earn the XP each time you kill it? (Basically making an XP factory).



Is there any rule which forbids that exploit?



Related question on turning defeated enemies into undead to defeat them again. This question differs from it because the creature is returning by its own natural ability and not a mechanic provided by an adventurer, which might affect whether it counts as “defeated” for the purpose of earning XP.






dnd-5e combat experience-points







share|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Why the downvote? If you explain to me I could try to fix it.
    $endgroup$
    – Ender Look
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @SevenSidedDie Could this question be reopened? I think the particularities of flameskulls and a careful reading of the rules can introduce additional value over the currently-marked dupe.
    $endgroup$
    – kviiri
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @kviiri Only if the question is revised so that it's not asking "can this be done in general, also here's an extra way I thought of" and focuses centrally on the part that is new. Right now this is asking the same question about how XP works for returning enemies, and will get the same answers.
    $endgroup$
    – SevenSidedDie♦
    5 hours ago








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Alright. Looking at what's written here now I don't see any reason given that a flameskull makes any difference, so I'm not inclined to use my vote, but maybe the community sees a difference and might reopen it.
    $endgroup$
    – SevenSidedDie♦
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SevenSidedDie As the OP mentions, there's a difference between this question and the dupe candidate in that the dupe covers adventurers deliberately raising a foe to fight it again, whereas the flameskull will revive on its own if steps are not taken (which brings up the question of whether it has actually been defeated if it's just going to pop back up).
    $endgroup$
    – Oblivious Sage
    4 hours ago
















8












$begingroup$


If you defeat a creature like a flameskull (Monster Manual p.135):




Eldritch Rejuvenation. A flameskull's shattered fragments reform unless they are splashed with holy water or subjected to a dispel magic or remove curse
spell. If it can no longer fulfill its intended purpose, the re-formed flameskull is beholden to no one and becomes autonomous.



Rejuvenation. If the flameskull is destroyed, it regains all its hit points in 1 hour unless holy water is sprinkled on its remains or dispel magic or remove curse spell is cast on them.




And wait for an hour, then you kill it again, an wait another hour, and kill it again... would you earn the XP each time you kill it? (Basically making an XP factory).



Is there any rule which forbids that exploit?



Related question on turning defeated enemies into undead to defeat them again. This question differs from it because the creature is returning by its own natural ability and not a mechanic provided by an adventurer, which might affect whether it counts as “defeated” for the purpose of earning XP.






dnd-5e combat experience-points







share|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Why the downvote? If you explain to me I could try to fix it.
    $endgroup$
    – Ender Look
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @SevenSidedDie Could this question be reopened? I think the particularities of flameskulls and a careful reading of the rules can introduce additional value over the currently-marked dupe.
    $endgroup$
    – kviiri
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @kviiri Only if the question is revised so that it's not asking "can this be done in general, also here's an extra way I thought of" and focuses centrally on the part that is new. Right now this is asking the same question about how XP works for returning enemies, and will get the same answers.
    $endgroup$
    – SevenSidedDie♦
    5 hours ago








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Alright. Looking at what's written here now I don't see any reason given that a flameskull makes any difference, so I'm not inclined to use my vote, but maybe the community sees a difference and might reopen it.
    $endgroup$
    – SevenSidedDie♦
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SevenSidedDie As the OP mentions, there's a difference between this question and the dupe candidate in that the dupe covers adventurers deliberately raising a foe to fight it again, whereas the flameskull will revive on its own if steps are not taken (which brings up the question of whether it has actually been defeated if it's just going to pop back up).
    $endgroup$
    – Oblivious Sage
    4 hours ago














8












8








8





$begingroup$


If you defeat a creature like a flameskull (Monster Manual p.135):




Eldritch Rejuvenation. A flameskull's shattered fragments reform unless they are splashed with holy water or subjected to a dispel magic or remove curse
spell. If it can no longer fulfill its intended purpose, the re-formed flameskull is beholden to no one and becomes autonomous.



Rejuvenation. If the flameskull is destroyed, it regains all its hit points in 1 hour unless holy water is sprinkled on its remains or dispel magic or remove curse spell is cast on them.




And wait for an hour, then you kill it again, an wait another hour, and kill it again... would you earn the XP each time you kill it? (Basically making an XP factory).



Is there any rule which forbids that exploit?



Related question on turning defeated enemies into undead to defeat them again. This question differs from it because the creature is returning by its own natural ability and not a mechanic provided by an adventurer, which might affect whether it counts as “defeated” for the purpose of earning XP.






dnd-5e combat experience-points







share|improve this question











$endgroup$




If you defeat a creature like a flameskull (Monster Manual p.135):




Eldritch Rejuvenation. A flameskull's shattered fragments reform unless they are splashed with holy water or subjected to a dispel magic or remove curse
spell. If it can no longer fulfill its intended purpose, the re-formed flameskull is beholden to no one and becomes autonomous.



Rejuvenation. If the flameskull is destroyed, it regains all its hit points in 1 hour unless holy water is sprinkled on its remains or dispel magic or remove curse spell is cast on them.




And wait for an hour, then you kill it again, an wait another hour, and kill it again... would you earn the XP each time you kill it? (Basically making an XP factory).



Is there any rule which forbids that exploit?



Related question on turning defeated enemies into undead to defeat them again. This question differs from it because the creature is returning by its own natural ability and not a mechanic provided by an adventurer, which might affect whether it counts as “defeated” for the purpose of earning XP.






dnd-5e combat experience-points




dnd-5e combat experience-points






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 4 hours ago









SevenSidedDie♦

208k31668945




208k31668945










asked 5 hours ago









Ender LookEnder Look

1,0351731




1,0351731












  • $begingroup$
    Why the downvote? If you explain to me I could try to fix it.
    $endgroup$
    – Ender Look
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @SevenSidedDie Could this question be reopened? I think the particularities of flameskulls and a careful reading of the rules can introduce additional value over the currently-marked dupe.
    $endgroup$
    – kviiri
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @kviiri Only if the question is revised so that it's not asking "can this be done in general, also here's an extra way I thought of" and focuses centrally on the part that is new. Right now this is asking the same question about how XP works for returning enemies, and will get the same answers.
    $endgroup$
    – SevenSidedDie♦
    5 hours ago








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Alright. Looking at what's written here now I don't see any reason given that a flameskull makes any difference, so I'm not inclined to use my vote, but maybe the community sees a difference and might reopen it.
    $endgroup$
    – SevenSidedDie♦
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SevenSidedDie As the OP mentions, there's a difference between this question and the dupe candidate in that the dupe covers adventurers deliberately raising a foe to fight it again, whereas the flameskull will revive on its own if steps are not taken (which brings up the question of whether it has actually been defeated if it's just going to pop back up).
    $endgroup$
    – Oblivious Sage
    4 hours ago


















  • $begingroup$
    Why the downvote? If you explain to me I could try to fix it.
    $endgroup$
    – Ender Look
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @SevenSidedDie Could this question be reopened? I think the particularities of flameskulls and a careful reading of the rules can introduce additional value over the currently-marked dupe.
    $endgroup$
    – kviiri
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @kviiri Only if the question is revised so that it's not asking "can this be done in general, also here's an extra way I thought of" and focuses centrally on the part that is new. Right now this is asking the same question about how XP works for returning enemies, and will get the same answers.
    $endgroup$
    – SevenSidedDie♦
    5 hours ago








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Alright. Looking at what's written here now I don't see any reason given that a flameskull makes any difference, so I'm not inclined to use my vote, but maybe the community sees a difference and might reopen it.
    $endgroup$
    – SevenSidedDie♦
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SevenSidedDie As the OP mentions, there's a difference between this question and the dupe candidate in that the dupe covers adventurers deliberately raising a foe to fight it again, whereas the flameskull will revive on its own if steps are not taken (which brings up the question of whether it has actually been defeated if it's just going to pop back up).
    $endgroup$
    – Oblivious Sage
    4 hours ago
















$begingroup$
Why the downvote? If you explain to me I could try to fix it.
$endgroup$
– Ender Look
5 hours ago




$begingroup$
Why the downvote? If you explain to me I could try to fix it.
$endgroup$
– Ender Look
5 hours ago












$begingroup$
@SevenSidedDie Could this question be reopened? I think the particularities of flameskulls and a careful reading of the rules can introduce additional value over the currently-marked dupe.
$endgroup$
– kviiri
5 hours ago




$begingroup$
@SevenSidedDie Could this question be reopened? I think the particularities of flameskulls and a careful reading of the rules can introduce additional value over the currently-marked dupe.
$endgroup$
– kviiri
5 hours ago












$begingroup$
@kviiri Only if the question is revised so that it's not asking "can this be done in general, also here's an extra way I thought of" and focuses centrally on the part that is new. Right now this is asking the same question about how XP works for returning enemies, and will get the same answers.
$endgroup$
– SevenSidedDie♦
5 hours ago






$begingroup$
@kviiri Only if the question is revised so that it's not asking "can this be done in general, also here's an extra way I thought of" and focuses centrally on the part that is new. Right now this is asking the same question about how XP works for returning enemies, and will get the same answers.
$endgroup$
– SevenSidedDie♦
5 hours ago






3




3




$begingroup$
Alright. Looking at what's written here now I don't see any reason given that a flameskull makes any difference, so I'm not inclined to use my vote, but maybe the community sees a difference and might reopen it.
$endgroup$
– SevenSidedDie♦
4 hours ago




$begingroup$
Alright. Looking at what's written here now I don't see any reason given that a flameskull makes any difference, so I'm not inclined to use my vote, but maybe the community sees a difference and might reopen it.
$endgroup$
– SevenSidedDie♦
4 hours ago




1




1




$begingroup$
@SevenSidedDie As the OP mentions, there's a difference between this question and the dupe candidate in that the dupe covers adventurers deliberately raising a foe to fight it again, whereas the flameskull will revive on its own if steps are not taken (which brings up the question of whether it has actually been defeated if it's just going to pop back up).
$endgroup$
– Oblivious Sage
4 hours ago




$begingroup$
@SevenSidedDie As the OP mentions, there's a difference between this question and the dupe candidate in that the dupe covers adventurers deliberately raising a foe to fight it again, whereas the flameskull will revive on its own if steps are not taken (which brings up the question of whether it has actually been defeated if it's just going to pop back up).
$endgroup$
– Oblivious Sage
4 hours ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















16












$begingroup$

No



The DMG says:




Each monster has an XP value based on its challenge rating. When adventurers defeat one or more monsters — typically by killing, routing, or capturing them — they divide the total XP value of the monsters evenly among themselves.




Until the Flameskull has been defeated you get no XP for it. It is not (necessarily) defeated by being reduced to 0hp; this is an example of what defeat might look like that is not applicable for this particular monster.



If the objective of the PCs is to get past the obstacle the Flameskull represents (e.g. to loot the treasure it’s guarding) then it is defeated when they do that. If their objective is to destroy it, then it’s defeated when the sprinkle its remains with holy water. Whatever the objective is, it can only happen once and the DM decides when that happens.



Now, it’s perfectly reasonable to defeat an enemy more than once if circumstances warrant: for example, they could defeat the Flameskull by getting its treasure and then, after learning of its regeneration ability and how to stop it they could defeat it again with this new objective.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    What if my objective is "get the skull to stop attacking me right now?" You say that it's about defeating, not killing, which sounds like a yes. But your headline says no. I find this a little confusing.
    $endgroup$
    – Michael W.
    3 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @MichaelW Smashing it, then standing there and watching it reassemble so you can do it again, is not defeating it. It is no less of a threat or obstacle afterward than when you started.
    $endgroup$
    – Mark Wells
    2 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @MarkWells It takes an hour to re-assemble. They are two distinct encounters. How is that not defeating it? Would your answer change if you were fighting a demon, sent it back to the Abyss by defeating it, and then it came back in a second encounter?
    $endgroup$
    – Michael W.
    1 hour ago












  • $begingroup$
    The DM as referee (see the introduction to the DMG) decides when monsters are defeated. The description for defeat, you see it's open to situations such as (but not limited to) "killing, routing, or capturing."
    $endgroup$
    – John Mickey
    1 hour ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    @MichaelW. Really? If the PCs ran away every time? Circumstances matter as I said in my answer.
    $endgroup$
    – Dale M
    1 hour ago



















13












$begingroup$

You can do this... kinda.



The Dungeon Master's Guide has this to say about awarding XP (page 260):




When adventurers defeat one or more monsters --- typically by killing, routing, or capturing them --- they divide the total XP value of the monsters evenly among themselves. [followed by clarification]




A literal reading suggests that you can kill the same enemy several times in order to gain its XP value many times. However, a more literal reading says that it's not the killing itself that counts --- it's defeating an enemy. The distinction is very meaningful when considering creatures that might not stay dead, such as flameskulls.



Consider a party in an enclosed space where they are constantly hounded by the same flameskulls, over and over again, until they find a way to destroy or evade them permanently. It would be a reasonable RAW judgment from the GM that killing the flameskulls does not constitute defeating them in this case --- you're merely inflicting a very temporary setback. However, in a dungeon where the players are expected to face an encounter of flameskulls and leave before their respawning can happen, killing them effectively accomplishes the players' objective and a reasonable RAW judgment would be to award the players the XP.



However, standing around a slain flameskull, waiting for it to reform, is not defeating it again. It's just toying with it --- there's no real or additional challenge involved in getting an easy kill from a just-reformed flameskull. As you can see from these examples, what exactly does defeating an enemy mean is somewhat ill-defined and therefore this scheme is dependent on the definition used by the GM.



Chances are no GM will let you farm XP



Experience farming is boring, and boredom shouldn't be a part of a TTRPG. Most GMs would either bluntly decide to no longer award experience for grinding, or come up with a creative punishment for trying to mess with the system. If you want a higher-level character, work it out with your GM instead of trying to subvert the rules.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$









  • 2




    $begingroup$
    +1 for pointing out that this is not something that would fly at most tables. I know I wouldn't want to DM or play in a game involving XP farming
    $endgroup$
    – Carl Kevinson
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    +1 here. D&D 5e seems to let you farm, but makes it boring and inefficient. I'd never allow it as DM, but it's in the rules...
    $endgroup$
    – Michael W.
    3 hours ago



















3












$begingroup$

Yes, but...



It's not that big of a deal. As NautArch points out,




Regarding Combat XP, the DMG simply states:




Each monster has an XP value based on its challenge rating. When adventurers defeat one or more monsters — typically by killing, routing, or capturing them — they divide the total XP value of the monsters evenly among themselves.




Technically, you are just killing it, letting it reform, and then killing it again...but have you really killed it?




If you DM determines that this is a valid "XP factory" and that killing it is the same as defeating it, you're going to have to understand the cost of such a factory.



A Flameskull has a challenge rating of 4 and is worth 1,100 XP. Assuming you have a party of 4 players at level 4, each time you kill the Skull, each of you gains 275 XP. 275 XP per hour at the cost of fighting a creature that can cast a myriad of spells unlimited number of times is not that much. With the bare minimum of 2,700 XP required to be level 4, it would take you 14 hours and 14 encounters with this skull to get to level 5 and another 28 hours and 28 encounters to get to level 6.



Think of the cost of fighting a creature with 40 HP, 13 AC, with multiple resistances, immunities, and condition immunities. It's not as easy as killing it instantly, because if you can't kill it instantly, it can cast a fireball every time it resurrects. Or, it can flee, attack, or otherwise drag out the encounter to make itself more deadly.



Generally speaking, characters aren't meant to have 14 medium-challenge encounters a day and aren't equipped to fight that many times without long resting. It's not much of an exploit, it's more of a strategy with a big cost. And if you want to continue fighting it, you can't ever stop to long rest or leave it alone for more than an hour because, in all likely-hood, it will flee or otherwise do something to stop your strategy (or make it difficult).



This says nothing about whether or not your DM actually lets you do this in a vacuum or do it at all. But yeah, if you want to make a very slow XP grinder, you can do it.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    3












    $begingroup$

    RAW, yes - this is technically a workable exploit



    Regarding Combat XP, the DMG simply states (emphasis mine):




    Each monster has an XP value based on its challenge rating. When adventurers defeat one or more monsters — typically by killing, routing, or capturing them — they divide the total XP value of the monsters evenly among themselves.




    Defeating doesn't necessarily mean killing



    Technically, you are just defeating it, letting it reform, and then killing it again.



    Whether or not the defeat is XP Worthy is up to your DM:



    It's going to be up to the DM



    While this is the technical rule, it is completely within the purview of your DM to say "stop this shenanigan...we're moving on."



    And they can say this via RAW.



    If the destroyed flameskull is not finished off, then it can be ruled that you haven't actually defeated it.



    in order to truly defeat it, you've got to finish the job by sprinkling holy water or by casting dispel magic or remove curse.



    This will all be up to the DM to determine when they think the creature has been defeated.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
      });
      });
      }, "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "122"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f142276%2fcan-you-earn-endless-xp-using-a-flameskull-and-its-self-revival-feature%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes








      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      16












      $begingroup$

      No



      The DMG says:




      Each monster has an XP value based on its challenge rating. When adventurers defeat one or more monsters — typically by killing, routing, or capturing them — they divide the total XP value of the monsters evenly among themselves.




      Until the Flameskull has been defeated you get no XP for it. It is not (necessarily) defeated by being reduced to 0hp; this is an example of what defeat might look like that is not applicable for this particular monster.



      If the objective of the PCs is to get past the obstacle the Flameskull represents (e.g. to loot the treasure it’s guarding) then it is defeated when they do that. If their objective is to destroy it, then it’s defeated when the sprinkle its remains with holy water. Whatever the objective is, it can only happen once and the DM decides when that happens.



      Now, it’s perfectly reasonable to defeat an enemy more than once if circumstances warrant: for example, they could defeat the Flameskull by getting its treasure and then, after learning of its regeneration ability and how to stop it they could defeat it again with this new objective.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$













      • $begingroup$
        What if my objective is "get the skull to stop attacking me right now?" You say that it's about defeating, not killing, which sounds like a yes. But your headline says no. I find this a little confusing.
        $endgroup$
        – Michael W.
        3 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @MichaelW Smashing it, then standing there and watching it reassemble so you can do it again, is not defeating it. It is no less of a threat or obstacle afterward than when you started.
        $endgroup$
        – Mark Wells
        2 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @MarkWells It takes an hour to re-assemble. They are two distinct encounters. How is that not defeating it? Would your answer change if you were fighting a demon, sent it back to the Abyss by defeating it, and then it came back in a second encounter?
        $endgroup$
        – Michael W.
        1 hour ago












      • $begingroup$
        The DM as referee (see the introduction to the DMG) decides when monsters are defeated. The description for defeat, you see it's open to situations such as (but not limited to) "killing, routing, or capturing."
        $endgroup$
        – John Mickey
        1 hour ago






      • 2




        $begingroup$
        @MichaelW. Really? If the PCs ran away every time? Circumstances matter as I said in my answer.
        $endgroup$
        – Dale M
        1 hour ago
















      16












      $begingroup$

      No



      The DMG says:




      Each monster has an XP value based on its challenge rating. When adventurers defeat one or more monsters — typically by killing, routing, or capturing them — they divide the total XP value of the monsters evenly among themselves.




      Until the Flameskull has been defeated you get no XP for it. It is not (necessarily) defeated by being reduced to 0hp; this is an example of what defeat might look like that is not applicable for this particular monster.



      If the objective of the PCs is to get past the obstacle the Flameskull represents (e.g. to loot the treasure it’s guarding) then it is defeated when they do that. If their objective is to destroy it, then it’s defeated when the sprinkle its remains with holy water. Whatever the objective is, it can only happen once and the DM decides when that happens.



      Now, it’s perfectly reasonable to defeat an enemy more than once if circumstances warrant: for example, they could defeat the Flameskull by getting its treasure and then, after learning of its regeneration ability and how to stop it they could defeat it again with this new objective.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$













      • $begingroup$
        What if my objective is "get the skull to stop attacking me right now?" You say that it's about defeating, not killing, which sounds like a yes. But your headline says no. I find this a little confusing.
        $endgroup$
        – Michael W.
        3 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @MichaelW Smashing it, then standing there and watching it reassemble so you can do it again, is not defeating it. It is no less of a threat or obstacle afterward than when you started.
        $endgroup$
        – Mark Wells
        2 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @MarkWells It takes an hour to re-assemble. They are two distinct encounters. How is that not defeating it? Would your answer change if you were fighting a demon, sent it back to the Abyss by defeating it, and then it came back in a second encounter?
        $endgroup$
        – Michael W.
        1 hour ago












      • $begingroup$
        The DM as referee (see the introduction to the DMG) decides when monsters are defeated. The description for defeat, you see it's open to situations such as (but not limited to) "killing, routing, or capturing."
        $endgroup$
        – John Mickey
        1 hour ago






      • 2




        $begingroup$
        @MichaelW. Really? If the PCs ran away every time? Circumstances matter as I said in my answer.
        $endgroup$
        – Dale M
        1 hour ago














      16












      16








      16





      $begingroup$

      No



      The DMG says:




      Each monster has an XP value based on its challenge rating. When adventurers defeat one or more monsters — typically by killing, routing, or capturing them — they divide the total XP value of the monsters evenly among themselves.




      Until the Flameskull has been defeated you get no XP for it. It is not (necessarily) defeated by being reduced to 0hp; this is an example of what defeat might look like that is not applicable for this particular monster.



      If the objective of the PCs is to get past the obstacle the Flameskull represents (e.g. to loot the treasure it’s guarding) then it is defeated when they do that. If their objective is to destroy it, then it’s defeated when the sprinkle its remains with holy water. Whatever the objective is, it can only happen once and the DM decides when that happens.



      Now, it’s perfectly reasonable to defeat an enemy more than once if circumstances warrant: for example, they could defeat the Flameskull by getting its treasure and then, after learning of its regeneration ability and how to stop it they could defeat it again with this new objective.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$



      No



      The DMG says:




      Each monster has an XP value based on its challenge rating. When adventurers defeat one or more monsters — typically by killing, routing, or capturing them — they divide the total XP value of the monsters evenly among themselves.




      Until the Flameskull has been defeated you get no XP for it. It is not (necessarily) defeated by being reduced to 0hp; this is an example of what defeat might look like that is not applicable for this particular monster.



      If the objective of the PCs is to get past the obstacle the Flameskull represents (e.g. to loot the treasure it’s guarding) then it is defeated when they do that. If their objective is to destroy it, then it’s defeated when the sprinkle its remains with holy water. Whatever the objective is, it can only happen once and the DM decides when that happens.



      Now, it’s perfectly reasonable to defeat an enemy more than once if circumstances warrant: for example, they could defeat the Flameskull by getting its treasure and then, after learning of its regeneration ability and how to stop it they could defeat it again with this new objective.







      share|improve this answer














      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer








      edited 1 hour ago

























      answered 4 hours ago









      Dale MDale M

      107k21276476




      107k21276476












      • $begingroup$
        What if my objective is "get the skull to stop attacking me right now?" You say that it's about defeating, not killing, which sounds like a yes. But your headline says no. I find this a little confusing.
        $endgroup$
        – Michael W.
        3 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @MichaelW Smashing it, then standing there and watching it reassemble so you can do it again, is not defeating it. It is no less of a threat or obstacle afterward than when you started.
        $endgroup$
        – Mark Wells
        2 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @MarkWells It takes an hour to re-assemble. They are two distinct encounters. How is that not defeating it? Would your answer change if you were fighting a demon, sent it back to the Abyss by defeating it, and then it came back in a second encounter?
        $endgroup$
        – Michael W.
        1 hour ago












      • $begingroup$
        The DM as referee (see the introduction to the DMG) decides when monsters are defeated. The description for defeat, you see it's open to situations such as (but not limited to) "killing, routing, or capturing."
        $endgroup$
        – John Mickey
        1 hour ago






      • 2




        $begingroup$
        @MichaelW. Really? If the PCs ran away every time? Circumstances matter as I said in my answer.
        $endgroup$
        – Dale M
        1 hour ago


















      • $begingroup$
        What if my objective is "get the skull to stop attacking me right now?" You say that it's about defeating, not killing, which sounds like a yes. But your headline says no. I find this a little confusing.
        $endgroup$
        – Michael W.
        3 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @MichaelW Smashing it, then standing there and watching it reassemble so you can do it again, is not defeating it. It is no less of a threat or obstacle afterward than when you started.
        $endgroup$
        – Mark Wells
        2 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @MarkWells It takes an hour to re-assemble. They are two distinct encounters. How is that not defeating it? Would your answer change if you were fighting a demon, sent it back to the Abyss by defeating it, and then it came back in a second encounter?
        $endgroup$
        – Michael W.
        1 hour ago












      • $begingroup$
        The DM as referee (see the introduction to the DMG) decides when monsters are defeated. The description for defeat, you see it's open to situations such as (but not limited to) "killing, routing, or capturing."
        $endgroup$
        – John Mickey
        1 hour ago






      • 2




        $begingroup$
        @MichaelW. Really? If the PCs ran away every time? Circumstances matter as I said in my answer.
        $endgroup$
        – Dale M
        1 hour ago
















      $begingroup$
      What if my objective is "get the skull to stop attacking me right now?" You say that it's about defeating, not killing, which sounds like a yes. But your headline says no. I find this a little confusing.
      $endgroup$
      – Michael W.
      3 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      What if my objective is "get the skull to stop attacking me right now?" You say that it's about defeating, not killing, which sounds like a yes. But your headline says no. I find this a little confusing.
      $endgroup$
      – Michael W.
      3 hours ago




      1




      1




      $begingroup$
      @MichaelW Smashing it, then standing there and watching it reassemble so you can do it again, is not defeating it. It is no less of a threat or obstacle afterward than when you started.
      $endgroup$
      – Mark Wells
      2 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      @MichaelW Smashing it, then standing there and watching it reassemble so you can do it again, is not defeating it. It is no less of a threat or obstacle afterward than when you started.
      $endgroup$
      – Mark Wells
      2 hours ago




      1




      1




      $begingroup$
      @MarkWells It takes an hour to re-assemble. They are two distinct encounters. How is that not defeating it? Would your answer change if you were fighting a demon, sent it back to the Abyss by defeating it, and then it came back in a second encounter?
      $endgroup$
      – Michael W.
      1 hour ago






      $begingroup$
      @MarkWells It takes an hour to re-assemble. They are two distinct encounters. How is that not defeating it? Would your answer change if you were fighting a demon, sent it back to the Abyss by defeating it, and then it came back in a second encounter?
      $endgroup$
      – Michael W.
      1 hour ago














      $begingroup$
      The DM as referee (see the introduction to the DMG) decides when monsters are defeated. The description for defeat, you see it's open to situations such as (but not limited to) "killing, routing, or capturing."
      $endgroup$
      – John Mickey
      1 hour ago




      $begingroup$
      The DM as referee (see the introduction to the DMG) decides when monsters are defeated. The description for defeat, you see it's open to situations such as (but not limited to) "killing, routing, or capturing."
      $endgroup$
      – John Mickey
      1 hour ago




      2




      2




      $begingroup$
      @MichaelW. Really? If the PCs ran away every time? Circumstances matter as I said in my answer.
      $endgroup$
      – Dale M
      1 hour ago




      $begingroup$
      @MichaelW. Really? If the PCs ran away every time? Circumstances matter as I said in my answer.
      $endgroup$
      – Dale M
      1 hour ago













      13












      $begingroup$

      You can do this... kinda.



      The Dungeon Master's Guide has this to say about awarding XP (page 260):




      When adventurers defeat one or more monsters --- typically by killing, routing, or capturing them --- they divide the total XP value of the monsters evenly among themselves. [followed by clarification]




      A literal reading suggests that you can kill the same enemy several times in order to gain its XP value many times. However, a more literal reading says that it's not the killing itself that counts --- it's defeating an enemy. The distinction is very meaningful when considering creatures that might not stay dead, such as flameskulls.



      Consider a party in an enclosed space where they are constantly hounded by the same flameskulls, over and over again, until they find a way to destroy or evade them permanently. It would be a reasonable RAW judgment from the GM that killing the flameskulls does not constitute defeating them in this case --- you're merely inflicting a very temporary setback. However, in a dungeon where the players are expected to face an encounter of flameskulls and leave before their respawning can happen, killing them effectively accomplishes the players' objective and a reasonable RAW judgment would be to award the players the XP.



      However, standing around a slain flameskull, waiting for it to reform, is not defeating it again. It's just toying with it --- there's no real or additional challenge involved in getting an easy kill from a just-reformed flameskull. As you can see from these examples, what exactly does defeating an enemy mean is somewhat ill-defined and therefore this scheme is dependent on the definition used by the GM.



      Chances are no GM will let you farm XP



      Experience farming is boring, and boredom shouldn't be a part of a TTRPG. Most GMs would either bluntly decide to no longer award experience for grinding, or come up with a creative punishment for trying to mess with the system. If you want a higher-level character, work it out with your GM instead of trying to subvert the rules.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$









      • 2




        $begingroup$
        +1 for pointing out that this is not something that would fly at most tables. I know I wouldn't want to DM or play in a game involving XP farming
        $endgroup$
        – Carl Kevinson
        3 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        +1 here. D&D 5e seems to let you farm, but makes it boring and inefficient. I'd never allow it as DM, but it's in the rules...
        $endgroup$
        – Michael W.
        3 hours ago
















      13












      $begingroup$

      You can do this... kinda.



      The Dungeon Master's Guide has this to say about awarding XP (page 260):




      When adventurers defeat one or more monsters --- typically by killing, routing, or capturing them --- they divide the total XP value of the monsters evenly among themselves. [followed by clarification]




      A literal reading suggests that you can kill the same enemy several times in order to gain its XP value many times. However, a more literal reading says that it's not the killing itself that counts --- it's defeating an enemy. The distinction is very meaningful when considering creatures that might not stay dead, such as flameskulls.



      Consider a party in an enclosed space where they are constantly hounded by the same flameskulls, over and over again, until they find a way to destroy or evade them permanently. It would be a reasonable RAW judgment from the GM that killing the flameskulls does not constitute defeating them in this case --- you're merely inflicting a very temporary setback. However, in a dungeon where the players are expected to face an encounter of flameskulls and leave before their respawning can happen, killing them effectively accomplishes the players' objective and a reasonable RAW judgment would be to award the players the XP.



      However, standing around a slain flameskull, waiting for it to reform, is not defeating it again. It's just toying with it --- there's no real or additional challenge involved in getting an easy kill from a just-reformed flameskull. As you can see from these examples, what exactly does defeating an enemy mean is somewhat ill-defined and therefore this scheme is dependent on the definition used by the GM.



      Chances are no GM will let you farm XP



      Experience farming is boring, and boredom shouldn't be a part of a TTRPG. Most GMs would either bluntly decide to no longer award experience for grinding, or come up with a creative punishment for trying to mess with the system. If you want a higher-level character, work it out with your GM instead of trying to subvert the rules.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$









      • 2




        $begingroup$
        +1 for pointing out that this is not something that would fly at most tables. I know I wouldn't want to DM or play in a game involving XP farming
        $endgroup$
        – Carl Kevinson
        3 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        +1 here. D&D 5e seems to let you farm, but makes it boring and inefficient. I'd never allow it as DM, but it's in the rules...
        $endgroup$
        – Michael W.
        3 hours ago














      13












      13








      13





      $begingroup$

      You can do this... kinda.



      The Dungeon Master's Guide has this to say about awarding XP (page 260):




      When adventurers defeat one or more monsters --- typically by killing, routing, or capturing them --- they divide the total XP value of the monsters evenly among themselves. [followed by clarification]




      A literal reading suggests that you can kill the same enemy several times in order to gain its XP value many times. However, a more literal reading says that it's not the killing itself that counts --- it's defeating an enemy. The distinction is very meaningful when considering creatures that might not stay dead, such as flameskulls.



      Consider a party in an enclosed space where they are constantly hounded by the same flameskulls, over and over again, until they find a way to destroy or evade them permanently. It would be a reasonable RAW judgment from the GM that killing the flameskulls does not constitute defeating them in this case --- you're merely inflicting a very temporary setback. However, in a dungeon where the players are expected to face an encounter of flameskulls and leave before their respawning can happen, killing them effectively accomplishes the players' objective and a reasonable RAW judgment would be to award the players the XP.



      However, standing around a slain flameskull, waiting for it to reform, is not defeating it again. It's just toying with it --- there's no real or additional challenge involved in getting an easy kill from a just-reformed flameskull. As you can see from these examples, what exactly does defeating an enemy mean is somewhat ill-defined and therefore this scheme is dependent on the definition used by the GM.



      Chances are no GM will let you farm XP



      Experience farming is boring, and boredom shouldn't be a part of a TTRPG. Most GMs would either bluntly decide to no longer award experience for grinding, or come up with a creative punishment for trying to mess with the system. If you want a higher-level character, work it out with your GM instead of trying to subvert the rules.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$



      You can do this... kinda.



      The Dungeon Master's Guide has this to say about awarding XP (page 260):




      When adventurers defeat one or more monsters --- typically by killing, routing, or capturing them --- they divide the total XP value of the monsters evenly among themselves. [followed by clarification]




      A literal reading suggests that you can kill the same enemy several times in order to gain its XP value many times. However, a more literal reading says that it's not the killing itself that counts --- it's defeating an enemy. The distinction is very meaningful when considering creatures that might not stay dead, such as flameskulls.



      Consider a party in an enclosed space where they are constantly hounded by the same flameskulls, over and over again, until they find a way to destroy or evade them permanently. It would be a reasonable RAW judgment from the GM that killing the flameskulls does not constitute defeating them in this case --- you're merely inflicting a very temporary setback. However, in a dungeon where the players are expected to face an encounter of flameskulls and leave before their respawning can happen, killing them effectively accomplishes the players' objective and a reasonable RAW judgment would be to award the players the XP.



      However, standing around a slain flameskull, waiting for it to reform, is not defeating it again. It's just toying with it --- there's no real or additional challenge involved in getting an easy kill from a just-reformed flameskull. As you can see from these examples, what exactly does defeating an enemy mean is somewhat ill-defined and therefore this scheme is dependent on the definition used by the GM.



      Chances are no GM will let you farm XP



      Experience farming is boring, and boredom shouldn't be a part of a TTRPG. Most GMs would either bluntly decide to no longer award experience for grinding, or come up with a creative punishment for trying to mess with the system. If you want a higher-level character, work it out with your GM instead of trying to subvert the rules.







      share|improve this answer














      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer








      edited 4 hours ago

























      answered 4 hours ago









      kviirikviiri

      36.9k11138212




      36.9k11138212








      • 2




        $begingroup$
        +1 for pointing out that this is not something that would fly at most tables. I know I wouldn't want to DM or play in a game involving XP farming
        $endgroup$
        – Carl Kevinson
        3 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        +1 here. D&D 5e seems to let you farm, but makes it boring and inefficient. I'd never allow it as DM, but it's in the rules...
        $endgroup$
        – Michael W.
        3 hours ago














      • 2




        $begingroup$
        +1 for pointing out that this is not something that would fly at most tables. I know I wouldn't want to DM or play in a game involving XP farming
        $endgroup$
        – Carl Kevinson
        3 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        +1 here. D&D 5e seems to let you farm, but makes it boring and inefficient. I'd never allow it as DM, but it's in the rules...
        $endgroup$
        – Michael W.
        3 hours ago








      2




      2




      $begingroup$
      +1 for pointing out that this is not something that would fly at most tables. I know I wouldn't want to DM or play in a game involving XP farming
      $endgroup$
      – Carl Kevinson
      3 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      +1 for pointing out that this is not something that would fly at most tables. I know I wouldn't want to DM or play in a game involving XP farming
      $endgroup$
      – Carl Kevinson
      3 hours ago












      $begingroup$
      +1 here. D&D 5e seems to let you farm, but makes it boring and inefficient. I'd never allow it as DM, but it's in the rules...
      $endgroup$
      – Michael W.
      3 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      +1 here. D&D 5e seems to let you farm, but makes it boring and inefficient. I'd never allow it as DM, but it's in the rules...
      $endgroup$
      – Michael W.
      3 hours ago











      3












      $begingroup$

      Yes, but...



      It's not that big of a deal. As NautArch points out,




      Regarding Combat XP, the DMG simply states:




      Each monster has an XP value based on its challenge rating. When adventurers defeat one or more monsters — typically by killing, routing, or capturing them — they divide the total XP value of the monsters evenly among themselves.




      Technically, you are just killing it, letting it reform, and then killing it again...but have you really killed it?




      If you DM determines that this is a valid "XP factory" and that killing it is the same as defeating it, you're going to have to understand the cost of such a factory.



      A Flameskull has a challenge rating of 4 and is worth 1,100 XP. Assuming you have a party of 4 players at level 4, each time you kill the Skull, each of you gains 275 XP. 275 XP per hour at the cost of fighting a creature that can cast a myriad of spells unlimited number of times is not that much. With the bare minimum of 2,700 XP required to be level 4, it would take you 14 hours and 14 encounters with this skull to get to level 5 and another 28 hours and 28 encounters to get to level 6.



      Think of the cost of fighting a creature with 40 HP, 13 AC, with multiple resistances, immunities, and condition immunities. It's not as easy as killing it instantly, because if you can't kill it instantly, it can cast a fireball every time it resurrects. Or, it can flee, attack, or otherwise drag out the encounter to make itself more deadly.



      Generally speaking, characters aren't meant to have 14 medium-challenge encounters a day and aren't equipped to fight that many times without long resting. It's not much of an exploit, it's more of a strategy with a big cost. And if you want to continue fighting it, you can't ever stop to long rest or leave it alone for more than an hour because, in all likely-hood, it will flee or otherwise do something to stop your strategy (or make it difficult).



      This says nothing about whether or not your DM actually lets you do this in a vacuum or do it at all. But yeah, if you want to make a very slow XP grinder, you can do it.






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$


















        3












        $begingroup$

        Yes, but...



        It's not that big of a deal. As NautArch points out,




        Regarding Combat XP, the DMG simply states:




        Each monster has an XP value based on its challenge rating. When adventurers defeat one or more monsters — typically by killing, routing, or capturing them — they divide the total XP value of the monsters evenly among themselves.




        Technically, you are just killing it, letting it reform, and then killing it again...but have you really killed it?




        If you DM determines that this is a valid "XP factory" and that killing it is the same as defeating it, you're going to have to understand the cost of such a factory.



        A Flameskull has a challenge rating of 4 and is worth 1,100 XP. Assuming you have a party of 4 players at level 4, each time you kill the Skull, each of you gains 275 XP. 275 XP per hour at the cost of fighting a creature that can cast a myriad of spells unlimited number of times is not that much. With the bare minimum of 2,700 XP required to be level 4, it would take you 14 hours and 14 encounters with this skull to get to level 5 and another 28 hours and 28 encounters to get to level 6.



        Think of the cost of fighting a creature with 40 HP, 13 AC, with multiple resistances, immunities, and condition immunities. It's not as easy as killing it instantly, because if you can't kill it instantly, it can cast a fireball every time it resurrects. Or, it can flee, attack, or otherwise drag out the encounter to make itself more deadly.



        Generally speaking, characters aren't meant to have 14 medium-challenge encounters a day and aren't equipped to fight that many times without long resting. It's not much of an exploit, it's more of a strategy with a big cost. And if you want to continue fighting it, you can't ever stop to long rest or leave it alone for more than an hour because, in all likely-hood, it will flee or otherwise do something to stop your strategy (or make it difficult).



        This says nothing about whether or not your DM actually lets you do this in a vacuum or do it at all. But yeah, if you want to make a very slow XP grinder, you can do it.






        share|improve this answer









        $endgroup$
















          3












          3








          3





          $begingroup$

          Yes, but...



          It's not that big of a deal. As NautArch points out,




          Regarding Combat XP, the DMG simply states:




          Each monster has an XP value based on its challenge rating. When adventurers defeat one or more monsters — typically by killing, routing, or capturing them — they divide the total XP value of the monsters evenly among themselves.




          Technically, you are just killing it, letting it reform, and then killing it again...but have you really killed it?




          If you DM determines that this is a valid "XP factory" and that killing it is the same as defeating it, you're going to have to understand the cost of such a factory.



          A Flameskull has a challenge rating of 4 and is worth 1,100 XP. Assuming you have a party of 4 players at level 4, each time you kill the Skull, each of you gains 275 XP. 275 XP per hour at the cost of fighting a creature that can cast a myriad of spells unlimited number of times is not that much. With the bare minimum of 2,700 XP required to be level 4, it would take you 14 hours and 14 encounters with this skull to get to level 5 and another 28 hours and 28 encounters to get to level 6.



          Think of the cost of fighting a creature with 40 HP, 13 AC, with multiple resistances, immunities, and condition immunities. It's not as easy as killing it instantly, because if you can't kill it instantly, it can cast a fireball every time it resurrects. Or, it can flee, attack, or otherwise drag out the encounter to make itself more deadly.



          Generally speaking, characters aren't meant to have 14 medium-challenge encounters a day and aren't equipped to fight that many times without long resting. It's not much of an exploit, it's more of a strategy with a big cost. And if you want to continue fighting it, you can't ever stop to long rest or leave it alone for more than an hour because, in all likely-hood, it will flee or otherwise do something to stop your strategy (or make it difficult).



          This says nothing about whether or not your DM actually lets you do this in a vacuum or do it at all. But yeah, if you want to make a very slow XP grinder, you can do it.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          Yes, but...



          It's not that big of a deal. As NautArch points out,




          Regarding Combat XP, the DMG simply states:




          Each monster has an XP value based on its challenge rating. When adventurers defeat one or more monsters — typically by killing, routing, or capturing them — they divide the total XP value of the monsters evenly among themselves.




          Technically, you are just killing it, letting it reform, and then killing it again...but have you really killed it?




          If you DM determines that this is a valid "XP factory" and that killing it is the same as defeating it, you're going to have to understand the cost of such a factory.



          A Flameskull has a challenge rating of 4 and is worth 1,100 XP. Assuming you have a party of 4 players at level 4, each time you kill the Skull, each of you gains 275 XP. 275 XP per hour at the cost of fighting a creature that can cast a myriad of spells unlimited number of times is not that much. With the bare minimum of 2,700 XP required to be level 4, it would take you 14 hours and 14 encounters with this skull to get to level 5 and another 28 hours and 28 encounters to get to level 6.



          Think of the cost of fighting a creature with 40 HP, 13 AC, with multiple resistances, immunities, and condition immunities. It's not as easy as killing it instantly, because if you can't kill it instantly, it can cast a fireball every time it resurrects. Or, it can flee, attack, or otherwise drag out the encounter to make itself more deadly.



          Generally speaking, characters aren't meant to have 14 medium-challenge encounters a day and aren't equipped to fight that many times without long resting. It's not much of an exploit, it's more of a strategy with a big cost. And if you want to continue fighting it, you can't ever stop to long rest or leave it alone for more than an hour because, in all likely-hood, it will flee or otherwise do something to stop your strategy (or make it difficult).



          This says nothing about whether or not your DM actually lets you do this in a vacuum or do it at all. But yeah, if you want to make a very slow XP grinder, you can do it.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered 4 hours ago









          Premier BromanovPremier Bromanov

          12.6k647110




          12.6k647110























              3












              $begingroup$

              RAW, yes - this is technically a workable exploit



              Regarding Combat XP, the DMG simply states (emphasis mine):




              Each monster has an XP value based on its challenge rating. When adventurers defeat one or more monsters — typically by killing, routing, or capturing them — they divide the total XP value of the monsters evenly among themselves.




              Defeating doesn't necessarily mean killing



              Technically, you are just defeating it, letting it reform, and then killing it again.



              Whether or not the defeat is XP Worthy is up to your DM:



              It's going to be up to the DM



              While this is the technical rule, it is completely within the purview of your DM to say "stop this shenanigan...we're moving on."



              And they can say this via RAW.



              If the destroyed flameskull is not finished off, then it can be ruled that you haven't actually defeated it.



              in order to truly defeat it, you've got to finish the job by sprinkling holy water or by casting dispel magic or remove curse.



              This will all be up to the DM to determine when they think the creature has been defeated.






              share|improve this answer











              $endgroup$


















                3












                $begingroup$

                RAW, yes - this is technically a workable exploit



                Regarding Combat XP, the DMG simply states (emphasis mine):




                Each monster has an XP value based on its challenge rating. When adventurers defeat one or more monsters — typically by killing, routing, or capturing them — they divide the total XP value of the monsters evenly among themselves.




                Defeating doesn't necessarily mean killing



                Technically, you are just defeating it, letting it reform, and then killing it again.



                Whether or not the defeat is XP Worthy is up to your DM:



                It's going to be up to the DM



                While this is the technical rule, it is completely within the purview of your DM to say "stop this shenanigan...we're moving on."



                And they can say this via RAW.



                If the destroyed flameskull is not finished off, then it can be ruled that you haven't actually defeated it.



                in order to truly defeat it, you've got to finish the job by sprinkling holy water or by casting dispel magic or remove curse.



                This will all be up to the DM to determine when they think the creature has been defeated.






                share|improve this answer











                $endgroup$
















                  3












                  3








                  3





                  $begingroup$

                  RAW, yes - this is technically a workable exploit



                  Regarding Combat XP, the DMG simply states (emphasis mine):




                  Each monster has an XP value based on its challenge rating. When adventurers defeat one or more monsters — typically by killing, routing, or capturing them — they divide the total XP value of the monsters evenly among themselves.




                  Defeating doesn't necessarily mean killing



                  Technically, you are just defeating it, letting it reform, and then killing it again.



                  Whether or not the defeat is XP Worthy is up to your DM:



                  It's going to be up to the DM



                  While this is the technical rule, it is completely within the purview of your DM to say "stop this shenanigan...we're moving on."



                  And they can say this via RAW.



                  If the destroyed flameskull is not finished off, then it can be ruled that you haven't actually defeated it.



                  in order to truly defeat it, you've got to finish the job by sprinkling holy water or by casting dispel magic or remove curse.



                  This will all be up to the DM to determine when they think the creature has been defeated.






                  share|improve this answer











                  $endgroup$



                  RAW, yes - this is technically a workable exploit



                  Regarding Combat XP, the DMG simply states (emphasis mine):




                  Each monster has an XP value based on its challenge rating. When adventurers defeat one or more monsters — typically by killing, routing, or capturing them — they divide the total XP value of the monsters evenly among themselves.




                  Defeating doesn't necessarily mean killing



                  Technically, you are just defeating it, letting it reform, and then killing it again.



                  Whether or not the defeat is XP Worthy is up to your DM:



                  It's going to be up to the DM



                  While this is the technical rule, it is completely within the purview of your DM to say "stop this shenanigan...we're moving on."



                  And they can say this via RAW.



                  If the destroyed flameskull is not finished off, then it can be ruled that you haven't actually defeated it.



                  in order to truly defeat it, you've got to finish the job by sprinkling holy water or by casting dispel magic or remove curse.



                  This will all be up to the DM to determine when they think the creature has been defeated.







                  share|improve this answer














                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer








                  edited 3 hours ago

























                  answered 4 hours ago









                  NautArchNautArch

                  58k8206385




                  58k8206385






























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid …



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f142276%2fcan-you-earn-endless-xp-using-a-flameskull-and-its-self-revival-feature%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      -

                      Popular posts from this blog

                      GameSpot

                      Image
                      body.skin-minerva .mw-parser-output table.infobox caption{text-align:center} GameSpot 戰地風雲：惡名昭彰2在Gamespot的評論 网站类型 新聞 持有者 CBS 创始人 Pete Deemer Vince Broady Jon Epstein 网站 http://www.gamespot.com/ 注册 Optional (free and paid) 推出时间 1996年5月1日 [1] GameSpot （中国大陆：游戏基地），於1996年5月由Pete Deemer和Vince Broady創立，是一個提供新聞、評論、預告片、下載及其他的相關資訊的電子遊戲網站。GameSpot被一間後來被CNET收購的企業ZDNet所收購。根據Alexa，GameSpot.com是200個網路擁擠最嚴重的網站之一。 除了由GameSpot員工創作的內容，網站還允許用戶寫評論、網誌、之後在網路論壇分享。一些在CNET旗下的GameFAQs分享。 2004年， GameSpot被Spike TV的觀眾選上「電子遊戲賞節目」贏得「最傑出遊戲網站。 [2] 其他的遊戲網站還有IGN、1UP.com、GameSpy是它最大的競爭對手。2008年，根據Compete.com的統計，「gamespot.com」吸引了最少6000萬人的點擊率。 [3] GameSpot的主頁鏈結了到最近新聞、評論、預告、和一些有關遊戲機的入口：Wii、任天堂DS、電腦遊戲、Xbox 360、PSP、PlayStation 2、PlayStation 3。它還有一列「最受歡迎遊戲名單」，還有給用戶快速獲得遊戲資訊的搜尋器。GameSpot 還包括一些小範圍的遊戲機：任天堂64、GameCube、Game Boy Color、Game Boy Advance、Xbox、PlayStation、SEGA Saturn、Dreamcast、Neo Geo Pocket Color、N-Gage、手機遊戲。 目录 1 歷史 1.1 國際歷史 1.2 著名的員工 2 評論和分...
                      Read more

                      日野市

                      Image
                      body.skin-minerva .mw-parser-output table.infobox caption{text-align:center} 日野市 日野市 日文轉寫  • 日文 日野市  • 平假名 ひのし  • 罗马字 Hino-shi 金剛寺（關東三十六不動尊靈場第9號）的不動堂 市旗 徽章 日野市在東京都的位置 日野市 日野市在日本的位置 坐标： 35°40′17″N 139°23′42″E  /  35.6714°N 139.395°E  / 35.6714; 139.395 国家   日本 地方 關東地方 都道府縣 東京都 接鄰行政區 府中市、國立市、立川市、昭島市、八王子市、多摩市 政府  • 市長 大坪冬彦 面积  •  总计 27.53 平方公里（10.63 平方英里） 人口 （2014年12月1日）  • 總計 183,323  • 密度 6,660/平方公里（17,200/平方英里） 象徵  • 市樹 樫  • 市花 菊花  • 市鳥 普通翠鳥 时区 日本標準時間 （UTC+9） 地方公共團體編號 13212-8 邮政编码 〒 191-8686 市役所地址 日野市神明一丁目12番1號 電話號碼 +81-42-585-1111 法人編號 1000020132128 網站 http://www.city.hino.lg.jp/ 人口：日野市官方網頁 日野市 （日语： 日野市 ／ ひのし   Hino shi   * / ? ）為一位于東京都（不含島嶼部分）中央地帶的城市。從東京站乘坐中央線特別快速列車45分鐘即可到該市。面積27.53km²。1963年（昭和38年）11月3日，該市開始實行市制，為全日本第559個市。汽車企業日野自動車的總部位於這裡。 往東京都特別區部的通勤率為20.9%，往八王子市的通勤率為12.0%（平成22年國勢調査）。 目录 1 概要 ...
                      Read more

                      Tu-95轟炸機

                      Image
                      body.skin-minerva .mw-parser-output table.infobox caption{text-align:center} 图-95 Ту–95 北约代号：熊（Bear） 一架在安格斯空军基地的图-95MS 概觀 類型 战略轰炸机 代號 北约代号： Bear （熊） 乘員 7名 駕駛員2名，機尾炮手1名，其他人員4名 首飛 1952年11月12日 服役 1956年 設計 圖波列夫設計局 產量 超过500架 現況 现役 主要用戶   蘇聯   俄羅斯 衍生機型 图-114、图-119、Tu-95 技术数据 長度 49.50米（162呎5吋） 翼展 51.10米（167呎8吋） 高度 12.12米（39呎9吋） 翼面積 310平方米（3,330平方呎） 空重 90,000公斤（198,000磅） 最大起飛重量 188,000公斤（414,500磅） 發動機 4具库兹涅佐夫NK-12MV型渦輪螺旋槳發動機 功率 4×11,000千瓦（14,800馬力） 性能數據 最大速度 925公里／時（500節，575哩／時） 爬升率 10米／秒（2,000呎／分） 最大升限 12,000米（39,000呎） 最大航程 15,000公里（8,100海浬，9,400哩） 翼負荷 606公斤／平方米（124磅／平方呎） 推重比 235 W／公斤（0.143馬力／磅） 武器装备 機炮 1具/2具AM-23型23公釐雷達控制機砲（機尾） 飛彈 空对地导弹： Kh-20、Kh-22 Kh-26、Kh-55 炸彈 60枚FAB-250炸彈，或 30枚FAB-500炸彈。 其他 载弹量（包括飞弹）：最多15,000公斤（33,000磅） Tu-95熊式MR型機 图-95 （俄语： Ту–95 ， 英语： Tu-95 ），北約代號： Bear （ 熊 ），是蘇聯圖波列夫設計局所研製，是全世界唯一服役的大型四渦輪螺旋槳發動機...
                      Read more