Community

Nov 13, 2012 -- 5:30AM, Shaddylogic wrote:

..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" class="mceContentBody " contenteditable="true" />Which would you say is requires less work, doing something or not doing something?  It is without a doubt easier to not do something than to do it.*  Not keeping track of XP is easier than keeping track of it period, there is no actual discussion it's not subjective. 

Oh  no on that we agree. Not tracking XP is easier. I was merely trying to point out that using the xp system Raw is, in effect, "doing nothing" when compared to excising it and replacing it with something of one's own creation (doing "something" in that scenario). Depending on how one wants to approach that revamp, the initial work involved is "something" compared to the "nothing" of leaving the system as is. If that makes sense?

You are right though that stock removal of XP tracking and ignoring it is objectively easier than tracking it in the same way that removing HP tracking all-together would be objectively easier than tracking it.

What is subjective, and what I mentioned and you missed in my original post, is whether the replacement system is easier to keep track of than XP.  However it is possible to create a system that requires less work than XP.  For the sake of proving the point let's say you the system in place has the characters level up at the end of every third session.  This is easier to implement than XP despite whatever flaws it may contain.

No no, we are agreed on this. I think I just didn't get across well what I was saying. We were "talking around each other" without really meaning to I suspect. You are entirely correct in this regard.

As for the keeping track of XP being easier than someone doing "spit-ball" guessing let's look at some of the questions for XP since it's not always a cut and dry game mechanic.  When do you give the players XP? After each action that would give them XP?  At the start or end of a session?  Whenever they rest?  At the end of combat? How much does each player get? Do they all get the same?  Do I reward them differently based on their actions?  Do I divide XP by who participated?  How about item creation?  Should I go word for word and suck large chunks of XP off the players who are making items?  Should I reward experience for actually making items?  Should I penalize characters and have them lose experience if their PC doesn't participate in adventures?  Should I reward XP for things like building up a village, and if so how much?

While XP is defined to some extend in D&D is also very much a "spit-ball" mechanic as well.

100% agreed. This is where I rely on the importance of a DM's individual consistency being paramount. I think DM consistency is about the number 1 most important thing in the game because, as referee, you need to be reliable in your decisions.
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" class="mceContentBody " contenteditable="true" />

I think Rewards are what drive most players to continue or advance in D&D, and they want to be rewarded for their actions in the game, and they want rewards for what they have earned.

I can't stress "Earned" enough here. The Players Earn Expereince, and denying them takes away the reward for thier actions. And when they accomplish something of meaning, something challenging or heroic then they should expect to be rewarded more then for some mundane, trivial task.

Yes, you can simply level them every 10 to 15 levels or ever 3rd game session, but by doing this you effectively trivialize the rewards for their heroism by making them equal to the trivial encounters.

Is killing a group of goblins on par with slaying a dragon? is a game session spent shopping/traveling with a couple of random encounters worth a game session spent being heroic, risking life in limb in an epic fighter that goes down in legend? You risk making the resource management encounters worth the same as the final Big Bad encounter.

After a serries of minor encounters and squirmishes, with XP rewards proportionate to the encounters, that big battle that really chalenges them, where they take heroic measures to win, getting that large XP reward that pushes them into the next level really sends a message, "hey you Earned your XP today! You really accomplished something"

Players anticipate these rewards, entering a fight like above they think, "alright I hope this is chalenging enough to give us the next level" rather then "Yay, it's day 3, we level after this, I hope the encounter isn't too hard" You can really create a different mindset with how you reward XP. 

I've DM'd with both awarding XP and just having them level when it's appropriate.   I think both methods have their pros and cons.

I'm currently running a campaign where we're tracking XP.   I hand it for defeating monsters (not necessarily beating them through combat), overcoming obstacles, completing quests, etc.   With the quest XP, I will award an amount appropriate to the degree of success the party had.

For individual stuff like innovative ideas, or cool roleplaying, I award a +1 or +2 chip.   These are just little poker chips that are consumables the players can use to turn a 'just missed' into a 'just hit'.   They are strictly used for attack rolls.

Is there only these two ways to play D&D? If I dont want to do the shopping that means the game has to be about kicking doors?

Nov 13, 2012 -- 11:03AM, Yokel wrote:

Is there only these two ways to play D&D? If I dont want to do the shopping that means the game has to be about kicking doors?

I never said that (although I concede that it may sound like that).  My point is that there are multiple ways to play and that some DMs and players have a much better time in town than they do out of it*.  When a part of the game that you don't fully enjoy comes up, you could always go your own way**.


* - During one game of which I was a part, there was an 'encounter' in the tavern.  The party's Wizard decided to ask the bartender/owner for something (I cannot recall what at this time, sadly) and the owner said okay, with the caveat that the Wizard would have to beat him in a contest (the bartender was a large man, so we all thought it'd be a show of strength).  The contest ended up being a pseudo-archery contest (the bartender was a former character of our DM's, and had a huge sword that he could throw with ease) at which the bartender was undefeated.  The bartender went first, flung the flaming sword, and imbedded it in the wall right in the middle of the target;  the Wizard proceeded to take out a piece of parchment, wrote something on it, attached it to the sword, hefted it, and hurled it (he rolled fairly well).  When he didn't hit the target as dead-center, everyone thought the worst...until it was read what was on the parchment.  "Ta-da!"  The bartender fell into fits of laughter and said that we could have what was asked for.

** - If you don't need to do shopping, you could always wander the town searching for something to strike your fancy...go berry-picking, chat with a hedge wizard, sit in the library and read, etc.