Quote from: chaosvoyagerNot conflict, tension.

Things like spilling soda on your date, or wondering if your bodyguard is about to betray you.

And come to think of it, all the reward systems I like build tension in some way, like D&D's HP and CoC's Sanity, as opposed to resolve conflict or increase status.

Tension is nothing more than sublimated conflict.  You're playing word games now.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_(narrative)

Quote from: Levi KornelsenThe confict was still there, regardless.

Conflict is at the heart of almost any action worth describing in an RPG - even if it's just the planning and shopping phases of preparation for a dungeon-crawl, it occurs because there is conflict of some kind.

Levi, please look back in the thread. I've been trying to focus on the main issue here--the concept of "reward systems" as applied to D&D. The definition of conflict and its role in fiction is really pretty peripheral, unless you're trying to draw attention to the interest & value of internal conflicts in D&D regardless of what the XP system does--which is basically my point.

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/DnD_DMG_XPFinal.asp

QuoteYou could award experience points for solving a puzzle, learning a secret, convincing an NPC to help, or escaping from a powerful foe. Mysteries, puzzles, and roleplaying encounters (such as negotiations) can be assigned Challenge Ratings, but these sorts of awards require more ad hoc ruling on the DM’s part.

Challenge Ratings for noncombat encounters are even more of a variable than traps. A roleplaying encounter should only be considered a challenge at all if there’s some risk involved and success or failure really matters. For example, the PCs encounter an NPC who knows the secret password to get into a magical prison that holds their companion. The PCs must get the information out of her—if they don’t, their friend remains trapped forever. In another instance, the characters must cross a raging river by wading, swimming, or climbing across a rope. If they fail, they can’t get to where the magic gem lies, and if they fail spectacularly they are washed away down the river.

You might see such situations as having a Challenge Rating equal to the level of the party. Simple puzzles and minor encounters should have a CR lower than the party’s level if they are worth an award at all. They should never have a CR higher than the party’s level. As a rule, you probably don’t want to hand out a lot of experience for these types of encounters unless you intentionally want to run a low-combat game.

In the end, this type of story award feels pretty much like a standard award. Don’t ever feel obligated to give out XP for an encounter that you don’t feel was much of a challenge. Remember that the key word in "experience award" is award. The PCs should have to do something impressive to get an award.

Quote from: Elliot WilenLevi, please look back in the thread. I've been trying to focus on the main issue here--the concept of "reward systems" as applied to D&D. The definition of conflict and its role in fiction is really pretty peripheral, unless you're trying to draw attention to the interest & value of internal conflicts in D&D regardless of what the XP system does--which is basically my point.

Fair enough.

In general, really sweet reward systems make me wonder how else they could be applied, so I go bouncing all over the map as a result.  Which leads pretty naturally to that tangent.

But I hear ya.

Quote from: Elliot WilenLevi, please look back in the thread. I've been trying to focus on the main issue here--the concept of "reward systems" as applied to D&D. The definition of conflict and its role in fiction is really pretty peripheral, unless you're trying to draw attention to the interest & value of internal conflicts in D&D regardless of what the XP system does--which is basically my point.

And my point is that the universal importance of conflict in the narrative sense is directly related to how D&D handles rewards, in the form of advice written in the damn book on giving rewards for all kinds of conflict or obstacle.  

In other words, Levi has a point, and you're arguing something that's an established fact, both in literature, and in the specific game being discussed.

Quote from: Elliot WilenThe person who originally uttered that claim in the thread agrees with me, but somehow Seanchai disagrees.

Ooh, i uttered a claim. Mom would be proud! Could i have snarled it instead? That's much cooler.

QuoteIf some sort of verbal gymnastics gets the reader to "dealing with internal conflict is a kind of 'overcoming obstacles'", then I'm done.

Thing is mate, that this could easily be counted as an obstacle for xp purposes in d&d (and other games?), if that's what is decided round the table. You also have 'roleplaying awards', which i always find too subjective, but hey, it's there.

I agree that obstacles aren't what roleplaying is all about, but ultimately, everything else is just what gets you there or gets you back again. I'm also thankful for whoever decided i was actually talking about conflict.

Quote from: J ArcaneTension is nothing more than sublimated conflict.  You're playing word games now.

Oops. My bad. I didn't mean to sound like I was correcting you. I was just trying to make the aspect of conflict being discussed more specific.

What I meant to say was that most games reward resolving conflict as opposed to building tension, and hence many character builds tend to be designed to resolve conflicts as efficiently as possible. But the last thing I want in my games is for conflicts to be resolved as efficiently as possible. In fact, sometimes I want to reward players for NOT resolving conflicts, but this goes against the mental grain of so many gamers that it's often hard to sell as a concept.

Quote from: chaosvoyagerOops. My bad. I didn't mean to sound like I was correcting you. I was just trying to make the aspect of conflict being discussed more specific.

What I meant to say was that most games reward resolving conflict as opposed to building tension, and hence many character builds tend to be designed to resolve conflicts as efficiently as possible. But the last thing I want in my games is for conflicts to be resolved as efficiently as possible. In fact, sometimes I want to reward players for NOT resolving conflicts, but this goes against the mental grain of so many gamers that it's often hard to sell as a concept.

I will agree with you that, even in the advice and optional sections, D&D tends to prefer resolution of conflict, and it also doesn't really touch on "Man vs. himself" much, except in the form of alignment conflicts, where it doesn't so much reward successful conflict resolution, as it does penalize failed resolution.

But by and large D&D aims for more of an action-packed adventure, and for that reason the mechanic serves beautifully.

Quote from: James J SkachCause, ya know, some sensitive D&D player might get the feeling you're implying hack n' slash/munchkinism is the only point to D&D.  Ya know, that you only roll-play not role-play.

Fuck that guy and the horse he rode in on.

One of the things that turned Diablo into a huge success was something D&D had (by that point) spent about 5 years trying to run away from to establish their "serious artistic street cred": the pure, healthy joy of kicking in the door of a dungeon, killing the foul thing inside and taking its stuff.

One town, one dungeon many, many levels deep, with a horrifying creature struggling to escape its last bonds and conquer the world. Am I talking about Diablo or the Temple of Elemental Evil? Yes.

Chuck

Quote from: chaosvoyagerWhat I meant to say was that most games reward resolving conflict as opposed to building tension, and hence many character builds tend to be designed to resolve conflicts as efficiently as possible. But the last thing I want in my games is for conflicts to be resolved as efficiently as possible. In fact, sometimes I want to reward players for NOT resolving conflicts, but this goes against the mental grain of so many gamers that it's often hard to sell as a concept.

I've run games where the rewards are giving for creating interpersonal conflicts.

LARPs, mind - where I can't track or manage all the action.

It has an effect on the landscape, doing that.

Quote from: chaosvoyagerOops. My bad. I didn't mean to sound like I was correcting you. I was just trying to make the aspect of conflict being discussed more specific.

What I meant to say was that most games reward resolving conflict as opposed to building tension, and hence many character builds tend to be designed to resolve conflicts as efficiently as possible. But the last thing I want in my games is for conflicts to be resolved as efficiently as possible. In fact, sometimes I want to reward players for NOT resolving conflicts, but this goes against the mental grain of so many gamers that it's often hard to sell as a concept.

This is a really interesting point, choas.  Do you think there's enough depth to start a new thread about reward systems based on not resolving conflicts? Do you think something could be tacked on to d20/D&D that would facilitate that kind of system?

Quote from: RPGObjects_chuckFuck that guy and the horse he rode in on.

One of the things that turned Diablo into a huge success was something D&D had (by that point) spent about 5 years trying to run away from to establish their "serious artistic street cred": the pure, healthy joy of kicking in the door of a dungeon, killing the foul thing inside and taking its stuff.

One town, one dungeon many, many levels deep, with a horrifying creature struggling to escape its last bonds and conquer the world. Am I talking about Diablo or the Temple of Elemental Evil? Yes.

It also applies to World of Warcraft when you're talking about their 5-man dungeon instances, their 10/20/25/40-man raid instances (or outdoor bosses, or faction leaders), and many of their better quests.  (Not to mention parts of my favorite Battleground, Alterac Valley.)  Hell, much of WOW is a development from the lessons of Diablo and Diablo II.

Quote from: James J SkachThis is a really interesting point, choas.  Do you think there's enough depth to start a new thread about reward systems based on not resolving conflicts? Do you think something could be tacked on to d20/D&D that would facilitate that kind of system?

Yes on both accounts, but I'm not sure theRPGsite is really the place to discuss it.

Regardless, one D20 Mod I use is to convert lost HP into Exp, so the only way to advance in level is to get your ass handed to you, just like real life. Sure you have to adjust the exchange rate for classes with lower hit dice, or better yet give everyone the same HP per level (as it's not really measuring health anymore), but it means that characters will have to face challenges that will affect them if they expect to improve. So characters are no longer rewarded for resolving conflicts, but by being threatened in them.

And this actually works rather well I've found, once certain players stop bitching about it

Quote from: chaosvoyagerYes on both accounts, but I'm not sure theRPGsite is really the place to discuss it.

Regardless, one D20 Mod I use is to convert lost HP into Exp, so the only way to advance in level is to get your ass handed to you, just like real life. Sure you have to adjust the exchange rate for classes with lower hit dice, or better yet give everyone the same HP per level (as it's not really measuring health anymore), but it means that characters will have to face challenges that will affect them if they expect to improve. So characters are no longer rewarded for resolving conflicts, but by being threatened in them.

And this actually works rather well I've found, once certain players stop bitching about it

Curious...why do you think it's not good to discuss it here?  I mean, I asked...right?

Your example doesn't change the focus away from conflicts though - whcih is cool because you've made me narrow my question.  Can you think of ways to mod d20/D&D to move away from experience-for-conflicts while still systematically awarding experience (and not meta-game stuff like who take the journal, etc.)?

Quote from: James J SkachCurious...why do you think it's not good to discuss it here?  I mean, I asked...right?

Fair enough, which is why I responded, but I find that the signal to noise ratio tends to be considerably bad here for matters of this kind. That's all.

But it's being usefully discussed now, and that's what matters.

Quote from: James J SkachYour example doesn't change the focus away from conflicts though - whcih is cool because you've made me narrow my question.  Can you think of ways to mod d20/D&D to move away from experience-for-conflicts while still systematically awarding experience (and not meta-game stuff like who take the journal, etc.)?

Are you talking about rewarding other forms of character behavior? One way to do that might be to allow characters to invoke disadvantages or impulses to gain Exp, but I'd also want to balance that in some manner so they don't go milking it constantly, or at undramatic moments.

One problem you run into here though is that Exp can quickly become a product of what the other players THINK you're doing. If you get points for acting cowardly, what happens if the GM doesn't believe you acted cowardly?

Sorry, I know it isn't much of an answer, but the soup's not finished yet.