Quote from: jhkim on January 10, 2025, 12:51:07 PMI'm inclined to agree with zend0g the most. I might still have XP in a Sword and Sorcery campaign, but it would be relatively minor like in Unisystem rather than D&D-like.

For S&S campaigns, a skill by skill XP system like in Runequest would be superior. If you want to get good at fighting you fight, if you want to get good at sneaking you sneak, etc.

Quote from: Socratic-DM on January 08, 2025, 04:30:42 PM2. In games where domain level play was not an end point or agenda, than it means characters had exorbitant wealth, but are still perusing basic dungeon delving? it seems to break a great deal of verisimilitude. why would rich merchants at this point need to risk their necks doing petty dungeon work?

The easiest way to stick to XP for gold without character accumulating massive wealth is to award XP for magic items based on their GP value. Especially for limited use things like potions and found spells. This way, most of the value of the XP awarded will be in things the players want to keep and the actual gold pieces found be a minor addition.

For me, it makes the most sense to require some kind of training to "level up" or improve in some way.  This training can come from practice in the field as adventuring, but is formalized in lessons from a "master" who is more skilled.  I can see gold being tracked as XP especially if you need to use that gold to pay for the training.  But if you have more of a long-term relationship with the master who is training your characters, XP would be in the form of tasks/quests the master gives the players, and the master would not expect to be "paid" for helping you level up because you've already agreed to some long term master/student kind of situation.

I suppose it really comes down to the setting/campaign you're trying to run.