Quote from: DavetheLost;927291This has been a general trend on RPG design. A smaller proportion of XP for killing monsters and stealing treasure, a larger proportion of XP for good roleplaying and overcoming obstacles.
XP for gold was supposed to function as an abstract way of giving XP for all the non-combat stuff. But the idea never really quite clicked with a lot of gamers.

No, XP for gold was supposed to turn wandering monsters into a hazard, not XP on the hoof.

But didn't wandering monsters still provide XP?  It's been so long since i actually read the Original rules I can't remember.

It is entirely possible I am misattributing later comentary to 0e. After so many years in the hobby, most of it GMing there is a lot of "this is the way it works" that isn't actually in the books.

Also, I was, and am, pretty far removed from Lake Geneva, didn't read a lot of Dragon, etc. So I was in one of those isolated pockets that learned the game by word of mouth and independant interpretation.

Yes, wandering monsters gave XP.  But ALL monster XP was chump change compared to 1 GP = 1 XP.

If you could sneak 1000 GP away from the 10 Orcs you were better off than killing the Orcs and getting the gold, because it didn't cost you any hit points, which meant you could stay in the dungeon longer.

Yes, that's why we took gangs of bearers and trains of mules with us into the dungeons. Someone had to carry all that loot, and encumberance was a bitch.
Then there was all the treasure that was in valuable, but bulky objects...especially valuable, bulky, delicate objects.

Although I did once put a pair of life sized solid gold statues of percherons in a dungeon. Don't ask me how thety got there, but they drove my players nuts trying to come up with a scheme to recover them... Enough XP for the whole party to level twice over, if they could keep the sculpture intact.

Quote from: cranebump;927150Star Trek went to shit when Abrams got involved.

Yes, because the intelligible-to-trekkies-only bullshit that was Star Trek was made accessible to everyone again by JJ Abrams. That bastard.

Quote from: CRKrueger;927147I was going to put up an "I know, right?" meme, but this is much more awesome, even if completely off topic...

Spoiler

Which makes my mind wander even further off topic.

Spoiler

[ATTACH=CONFIG]491[/ATTACH]

Which makes me miss Gamma World!

I don't like XP at all, but if I were to use XP in a game, it would be based on what I want the theme of the campaign to be about. If its Swords & Sorcery rogue adventurers hexcrawling for trouble and loot, then XP for gold works great. If its High Fantasy heroes on a mission for King & Country, then XP for gold doesn't work.

Quote from: MES;926283Hallo Forum [etc]

Dear OP, if your DM is such a pitiful DM, presumably you feel you can do a better job? Then do so. Propose giving the DM a break of a few weeks while you run a 4-session mini-campaign. After the 1st session, explain the DMing philosophy you're going to bring to your mini-campaign in a way he can derive inspiration from, without feeling targeted by it. You can do so under cover of asking for feedback from the group (feedback for your own DMing).

Quote from: Lunamancer;926299Maybe it's just me, but how am I supposed to get excited about investigating the deaths of some cows?

Maybe all is not as it seems? If your character would get excited, follow their excitement. Probably the DM is not actually going to limit it to some cows dying for the entire length of the campaign.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;927262Some DMs like to write stories and have their players trapped in them. Simply stop showing up at such games.

That's a bit fatalistic isn't it? People are social creatures and games are a social experience. Part of the onus is on the players to help the GM to get better at GMing and (additionally) to get the most out of the game. Sometimes GMs haven't fully thought through how their GMing style plays out, and will modify it when prompted. If your first response is to vote with your feet, it's a bit like no-platforming someone because you want a safe space and trigger warnings. There may simply have been a few misunderstandings along the way. Radical disengagement is not always the answer, and should rarely be the first answer.

Quote from: jeff37923;927327Yes, because the intelligible-to-trekkies-only bullshit that was Star Trek was made accessible to everyone again by JJ Abrams. That bastard.

I guess I'm not everyone then. I couldn't make it past the third scene or so of the second Abrams movie, due to the insufferable level of Abrams nonsense. My "honest trailers" script would read something like, "IMAGINE a uuuniverse where only the best are chosen for starship command, so naturally they have to throw out all their silly rules and regulations to make room for the tremendous ego of Millennial James T. Kirk, the young buff man-child version of Shatner's Kirk, but mad at the universe for having been orphaned or something, and so addicted to taking pointless risks with everyone and everything around him, and breaking every rule in the book, but getting away with it because drool of cool rules this universe, and no one's brass medals beat this punk captain's brass balls, which will bend your disbelief to the breaking point accompanied by amazing pacing, dazzling pacing, attractive young hip people somehow being senior officers, and gratuitous sexy time.

Not to mention the "intelligible to trekkies" shit started in Pepsi Generation.  Roddenberry wasn't even involved at first, and by then was believing his own hype anyway - not to mention Roddenberry died in 91.  Frankly, as time has gone on, each iteration of Star Trek has sucked worse and worse.

The thing I hated about the New Khan movie is the same thing I hated about other ST movies and series, that has the Klingon capital world 20 fucking minutes from Earth.  Yeah I realize Abrahms, fast-paced, bang boom pow, etc.  Even Star Wars the supposedly less cerebral space film series, had scenes and time pass between Tatooine and Alderaan.

Quote from: Skarg;927457I guess I'm not everyone then. I couldn't make it past the third scene or so of the second Abrams movie, do to the insufferable level of Abrams nonsense. My "honest trailers" script would read something like, "IMAGINE a uuuniverse where only the best are chosen for starship command, so naturally they have to throw out all their silly rules and regulations to make room for the tremendous ego of Millennial James T. Kirk, the young buff man-child version of Shatner's Kirk, but mad at the universe for having been orphaned or something, and so addicted to taking pointless risks with everyone and everything around him, and breaking every rule in the book, but getting away with it because drool of cool rules this universe, and no one's brass medals beat this punk captain's brass balls, which will bend your disbelief to the breaking point accompanied by amazing pacing, dazzling pacing, attractive young hip people somehow being senior officers, and gratuitous sexy time.

You forgot to bitch about lens flare.