What's your preference? Why?
I know this will not be the majority on here but I say Milestones. Because it is easy and makes sense.
I freely admit, I hate tracking 4-digit XP totals in my current 5E game. Put me down for milestones or small but meaningful points a la D6 Star Wars or Savage Worlds.
Depends on the game. But overall, I also find milestones simpler to track and integrate the characters with setting/situation.
Points per session. I like to assign xp to/for just about everything, so I need to be able to divide the xp rewards fine enough.
In general, it doesn't matter. I'll swap between methods from campaign to campaign. If I had my druthers for a default though, it would be XP points with a bunch of the zeroes dropped. I'd have been fine, for example, with a 5E chart that filed one zero off of everything, scaled less, and awarded less. With some judicious rounding. I don't, however, want it scaled down to the Hero/GURPS 1-5 XP point. I like a system where getting about 10 per unit (session, half-session, hour, whatever) is the standard, but you might get 8 or 12.
Definitely XP. I/players see the counter ticking up to the next level. It makes me hungry for more XP.
I didn't know just how much I loved XP until I played with GMs who just gave out levels when they felt like it. Compared to that, XP feels very empowering - I can see the results of my actions in my progress.
Never milestones or story arcs. Boring, boring, boring. One of the things I hate about Pathfinder adventure paths.
What you get them for will vary from game to game, but it should be for what you DO.
A milestone is XP for what you do.
Im kind of on the fence but in my experience I have found that any XP/Development award directly connected to player/character behavior tends to push that behavior. Need gold? Characters are grabbing all they can. Need to kill monsters? Characters are murdering maniacs. When switching to something like Milestones it puts the emphasis back on their actions as adventurers, back on the overall objective of their current plot or whatever. Suddenly it makes sense to avoid conflict sometimes, let treasure go and just move on with the mission at hand.
Quote from: rgrove0172;1002059Im kind of on the fence but in my experience I have found that any XP/Development award directly connected to player/character behavior tends to push that behavior. Need gold? Characters are grabbing all they can. Need to kill monsters? Characters are murdering maniacs. When switching to something like Milestones it puts the emphasis back on their actions as adventurers, back on the overall objective of their current plot or whatever. Suddenly it makes sense to avoid conflict sometimes, let treasure go and just move on with the mission at hand.
Who defines the "plot" or "mission at hand"? I've taken to really liking sand box games. Having anything other than an objective XP system is sort of counter to the sand box.
But, hey, what about "none of the above" as an answer? I'm playing and running a bunch of Classic Traveller. There is no xp reward system (there IS a means for character improvement though).
As to OD&D, yea, so it gives XP for gold (and killing monsters, but much more for gold). So yea, players are incentivized to loot the dungeons. Well the game IS
Dungeons and Dragons... But with the bulk of the XP coming from gold, there actually is incentive to avoid killing just for killing's sake. And that also means that if you find some other clever way to earn gold, that should work just as well for gaining XP. And as a GM of OD&D, if you really want to entice your players to do something for the king? Offer gold. BAM, you've got your milestone reward... The trick is the players get to decide whether to accept the mission or not...
I would also play Rune Quest. Almost any skill may be improved by using it, and almost any skill may be improved with training (which usually costs silver). So players can be rewarded for non-combat missions, improving the skills they use in said mission, and using the payment for training.
Frank
Ive never played in the higher levels of D&D so I would have to ask ... do the steadily increasing XP requirements more or less even out with the XP awarded by appropriate encounter challenges? A glance at the chart and the MM would seem to indicate they do and if so then an alternative that more or less allows leveling on a flat scale of 1 Level per so many adventures or encounters or months or whatever... wouldnt seem to be all that much of a hindrance/advantage/difference. Or am I wrong?
Quote from: ffilz;1002065Who defines the "plot" or "mission at hand"? I've taken to really liking sand box games. Having anything other than an objective XP system is sort of counter to the sand box.
Frank
How would that be? If anything I would think the freedom of Sandbox would be enhanced by a system wherein the character's objectives and priorities determine their development rather than some arbitrary number of dead critters or coins in the pouch. If in your Sandbox they decide that they just HAVE to end the plot against Good King Nutcracker then that sounds like a great goal to mate with some XP, or even a level all its own. Dont you think?
I award experience for what happens during the game. I don't know what "milestones" or "story arcs" mean in relation to experience points in RPGs. Explicate,if you will.
Quote from: Dumarest;1002116I award experience for what happens during the game. I don't know what "milestones" or "story arcs" mean in relation to experience points in RPGs. Explicate,if you will.
THey are alternative way points towards earning experience. A destination reached, a piece of information gained etc. Or in the line of a story when the party reach a certain point in the action.. when they clear the monestary or land at the Port City they are headed to or whatever. Its an attempt to make experience fit more narratively into the game when occasional priorities are met, rests are taken and that sort of thing. I havent used it yet but Im really considering something along those lines. I can see many advantages and havent seen a downside yet.
Quote from: rgrove0172;1002123THey are alternative way points towards earning experience. A destination reached, a piece of information gained etc. Or in the line of a story when the party reach a certain point in the action.. when they clear the monestary or land at the Port City they are headed to or whatever. Its an attempt to make experience fit more narratively into the game when occasional priorities are met, rests are taken and that sort of thing. I havent used it yet but Im really considering something along those lines. I can see many advantages and havent seen a downside yet.
Hmm. I guess I have no objection to awards for achieving a goal but for me it would need to be a goal the players/PCs have set for themselves...not sure what the best way to gauge value would be.
I mostly am playing Traveller, DC Heroes, and hopefully Ghostbusters if the stars align, so I'm not doing a lot of experience --> levels --> increased powers these days.
Quote from: rgrove0172;1002123I can see many advantages and havent seen a downside yet.
There's really only one disadvantage to be aware of. (The rest will be very obvious, and will cause pushback from players almost immediately.) Sometimes players will continue to run along as if they were getting experience in the traditional way. Everything works fine, and then there is a delayed reaction 6 months, a year, or longer after the switch. The players change behavior to match the new methods. This can be subtle. Sometimes people don't like the result, but it sneaks up on you. If you aren't watching for it, you can run along with everyone getting increasingly disgruntled, and not realize why for some time.
Many players will say they are fine with this, but only later learn they are not.
That's not academic. I've personally witnessed it in over 10 players in multiple groups. (But not all players in those groups.) For that reason, it's not a bad idea to take stock every few months or so to explicitly see if players are fine with the method you are using. Listen in particular for comments such as, "Don't feel as if my actions matter to advancement," or similar things not even that plain. Absent that, as I said earlier, it really doesn't matter how you do it. Just do something that works with minimal fuss.
Quote from: rgrove0172;1002123THey are alternative way points towards earning experience. A destination reached, a piece of information gained etc. Or in the line of a story when the party reach a certain point in the action.. when they clear the monestary or land at the Port City they are headed to or whatever. Its an attempt to make experience fit more narratively into the game when occasional priorities are met, rests are taken and that sort of thing. I havent used it yet but Im really considering something along those lines. I can see many advantages and havent seen a downside yet.
What happens if the players fail? What happens if Good King Nutsack DOESN'T get put back on the throne? What happens if they are hunting down Celerus the Nutpuncher and decide to join him and his Squeaky Men instead?
Essentially, I'm opposed to anything that ties XP to something that's "supposed" to happen.
In my case I really don't use xp, as it traditionally is/was used in D&D, any more. I much prefer milestones these days, and will advance them a level based upon the set number of goals achieved. Most of my current Tekumel campaign is political intrigue, back room deals, etc. It's hard to assign an xp value for convincing someone to do this, or for hiring an assassin, or administering a beating to the sod who owes the clan money, etc... Normally, I decide when designing a specific scenario or "dungeon" what I feel the reward should be based upon its difficulty, relatively speaking, and how many goals they attain with regards to the "big overall picture" in my game. Some other things that I watch is how they interact with NPC's, do they play by the rules or are they running roughshod and alienating themselves and behaving in an ignoble manner -something very important in a setting like Tekumel where the notion of "face" is quite similar to what it would be in Japan. Going forward I probably will eventually eliminate xp altogether.
Shemek
Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1002138What happens if the players fail? What happens if Good King Nutsack DOESN'T get put back on the throne? What happens if they are hunting down Celerus the Nutpuncher and decide to join him and his Squeaky Men instead?
Essentially, I'm opposed to anything that ties XP to something that's "supposed" to happen.
Hmm, yeah, our PCs still get experience whether or not they fail...that's why I had those questions up above about how they're setting goals and how you gauge awards. Eh, I'll just keep doing as I've been doing and award experience based on what happens in the game and what the characters do.
Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1002138What happens if the players fail? What happens if Good King Nutsack DOESN'T get put back on the throne? What happens if they are hunting down Celerus the Nutpuncher and decide to join him and his Squeaky Men instead?
Essentially, I'm opposed to anything that ties XP to something that's "supposed" to happen.
This for me is the most difficult part of not using xp as it's presented in the rules. In the case you mention above I would fall back on how Tsolyani they were being and take it from there. I'm relating it to Tekumel b/c that's the only gaming I do these days. My players are Vriddi, you know better than I do what this means. Do they act like Vriddi. Let's say Good King Nutsack doesn't get put back on the throne, but my players decide we will put one of ours on the throne instead. This will benefit the clan, score us some points with the elders, and give us some influence we can trade in on down the road. If it played out this way I really would have to give them something, as ultimately they were looking after the clan's interests which supersedes anyone or anything else's interests, save for Vimuhla. Something still did happen, not what was "supposed to," but something positive from a certain perspective.
Honestly I mostly wing it these days. If I feel that it makes sense for the group to increase in power, whether in HP or influence, then I increase them. I'll give you an example from a recent game. The two warriors were given an Imperial Commission to Hereksa issued directly from the Chancery in Avanthar, and the Priest was advanced to 4th Circle with the approval of the High Priest of Vimuhla in Fasiltum. In the game these were major events, but the characters didn't get to roll new HP, or get a new spell, or a magic sword. They are now marked in certain circles as up and comers, people to keep an eye on. Their power has grown in the game.
Quote from: Dumarest;1002133Hmm. I guess I have no objection to awards for achieving a goal but for me it would need to be a goal the players/PCs have set for themselves...not sure what the best way to gauge value would be.
I mostly am playing Traveller, DC Heroes, and hopefully Ghostbusters if the stars align, so I'm not doing a lot of experience --> levels --> increased powers these days.
Yes, this is how I understand Milestones to be. You declare something that drives or defines your character (say, "I'm a ladies man") and everytime you do it successfuly during game ("I roll to flirt with the queen... success") you gain xp. Usually it's implied that it only works on relevant situations for the adventure (so the ladies man don't bang all ladies in village just to pile up xp ).
I seem to recall the ballyhooed Marvel Heroic RPG had "milestones" for experience, but I was baffled because it was like "Gain a level if Wolverine loses his temper" simultaneous with "Gain a level if Wolverine keeps his temper in check" and "Win big if Iron Man resists drinking" simultaneous with "Win big if Iron Man goes on a bender." I was like, "Wait, what? How do I fail?"
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1002134There's really only one disadvantage to be aware of. (The rest will be very obvious, and will cause pushback from players almost immediately.) Sometimes players will continue to run along as if they were getting experience in the traditional way. Everything works fine, and then there is a delayed reaction 6 months, a year, or longer after the switch. The players change behavior to match the new methods. This can be subtle. Sometimes people don't like the result, but it sneaks up on you. If you aren't watching for it, you can run along with everyone getting increasingly disgruntled, and not realize why for some time. Many players will say they are fine with this, but only later learn they are not.
That's not academic. I've personally witnessed it in over 10 players in multiple groups. (But not all players in those groups.) For that reason, it's not a bad idea to take stock every few months or so to explicitly see if players are fine with the method you are using. Listen in particular for comments such as, "Don't feel as if my actions matter to advancement," or similar things not even that plain. Absent that, as I said earlier, it really doesn't matter how you do it. Just do something that works with minimal fuss.
I suppose and will consider your warning but I really dont see how a backlash is possible unless they relish the superficial and metagamey aspect of the original system. To use your example how much more their actions matter to advancement if they are pointed in the exact direction of their own goals instead of an arbitrary sideline like killing stuff. Point taken though.
My favourite of all is incremental increases. You choose 1 thing from next level and get it at the end of a session. By the end of the adventure you have levelled up completely (generally max 1 level per adventure). If you want slower advancement, or use a system with few increases, just make it every 2 sessions or 3.
Next favourite, milestones.
I do also like xp however.
Quote from: Dumarest;1002154I seem to recall the ballyhooed Marvel Heroic RPG had "milestones" for experience, but I was baffled because it was like "Gain a level if Wolverine loses his temper" simultaneous with "Gain a level if Wolverine keeps his temper in check" and "Win big if Iron Man resists drinking" simultaneous with "Win big if Iron Man goes on a bender." I was like, "Wait, what? How do I fail?"
I think the idea was to incentivate players to act like Wolverine and face his dilemmas. It was like a "track" if I remember right: 1xp when Wolvie acted with violence, 5xp when he lose control and create a problem for his team; 10xp when Wolvie reached a point in the story where he deals with his violance issues once and for all, either by adhering to his violent ways, or changing and renegating it permanently. I remember this because I played Wolvie in a session of MHR. :D
Being honest though, I'm not a fan of the way MHR implemented milestones. Felt too on rails.
Quote from: Itachi;1002161I think the idea was to incentivate players to act like Wolverine and face his dilemmas. It was like a "track" if I remember right: 1xp when Wolvie acted with violence, 5xp when he lose control and create a problem for his team; 10xp when Wolvie reached a point in the story where he deals with his violance issues once and for all, either by adhering to his violent ways, or changing and renegating it permanently. I remember this because I played Wolvie in a session of MHR. :D
Being honest though, I'm not a fan of the way MHR implemented milestones. Felt too on rails.
That leads me back to the "Wow, this game is badly arranged and edited" issue I had with trying to learn the rules. :D
Quote from: rgrove0172;1002155I suppose and will consider your warning but I really dont see how a backlash is possible unless they relish the superficial and metagamey aspect of the original system. To use your example how much more their actions matter to advancement if they are pointed in the exact direction of their own goals instead of an arbitrary sideline like killing stuff. Point taken though.
From asking players afterwards, I think there are a variety of reasons, and most they would not be able to articulate until they had some experience using an alternate method. It's not a big deal really, just something to keep an eye on until everything settle down nicely.
I hate XP.
I far prefer milestone/story arc/per adventure. AKA, go forth, do shit, and if you don't die, you get a level.
BUT...some players love XP.
Thus, I am happy to figure out an advancement scheme based on my players. AKA, how fast do they need to level to feel forward momentum?
I have found the SAME group will have DIFFERENT answers depending on the game system. For instance, my old crew needed D&D levels to be cranking, but they couldn't care less about advancement in Traveller, Star Wars or Gamma World.
In my OD&D game, you get a level if you survive the adventure. It's max 10 levels and then PCs become NPCs and we sing the Circle of Life song.
Quote from: Voros;1002050A milestone is XP for what you do.
No. Not really.
You could slay 10 orcs or defeat just 1 and it wont matter with the milestone method. You still level up.
Back on topic.
As a DM I have a index card with the EXP total.
Each session I tally up what all was done and gained and add that to the total. Its pretty simple and I can at a glance have an idea what level everyone is even without my notes on what level everyone is.
Though my favourite systems dont have levels or EXP. Gamma World and particularly Star Frontiers. In SF you get skill points you can put towards improving skills, learning new skills, or improving stats. Handed out at certain junction points in an adventure. Like 1 or 2 depending on what the players and PCs did or didnt.
I quite like the idea of using XP milestones, but most ppl I run DnD for strongly doNOT like it.
It feels like calculating XP after every session is one of those DnD "Sacred cows" for many people.
Quote from: danskmacabre;1002207I quite like the idea of using XP milestones, but most ppl I run DnD for strongly doNOT like it.
It feels like calculating XP after every session is one of those DnD "Sacred cows" for many people.
For myself, I went through a phase where characters leveled up after X sessions. It worked, but I found it very unsatisfying. I've since gone back to using XP, and am quite happy with it.
I know in my Classic D&D campaign, after the PCs hit Name level and needed 100-150,000 XP per level I eventually went over to ad hoc awards based off the recommended 1/5 of a level per session. So a lot like milestones. I mostly did this because I didn't want to be handing out stupid amounts of gold each session, the recommended approach. I did occasionally reality-check by calculating the XP to be sure I was in the right ballpark. I think I went to 5 times monster XP since the PCs were getting about 1/5 recommended gp.
Probably the best, even if I don't get to use it often.
(https://i.imgur.com/D86lCvo.png)
Quote from: Spinachcat;1002185I have found the SAME group will have DIFFERENT answers depending on the game system. For instance, my old crew needed D&D levels to be cranking, but they couldn't care less about advancement in Traveller, Star Wars or Gamma World.
That matches my experience. The same group that was quite happy with a modified Hero System advancement that used effectively big chunks of milestone XP (albeit relatively small numbers given the system), was unhappy using an almost identical copy of that milestone system in D&D. After we talked it out, one of the players summed up their attitude as, "When we play D&D, we want to play D&D." They have been, however, happy to accept "minor quests" as a supplement to their usual monster killing and treasure gathering efforts. The minor quests work out to be about 20% of the XP gained, and satisfy my need to dangle a carrot for picking and goal and going after it.
Quote from: S'mon;1002217I know in my Classic D&D campaign, after the PCs hit Name level and needed 100-150,000 XP per level I eventually went over to ad hoc awards based off the recommended 1/5 of a level per session. So a lot like milestones. I mostly did this because I didn't want to be handing out stupid amounts of gold each session, the recommended approach. I did occasionally reality-check by calculating the XP to be sure I was in the right ballpark. I think I went to 5 times monster XP since the PCs were getting about 1/5 recommended gp.
My scheme is to reverse engineer xp awards by how many session I'd like the characters to progress. That gives me a baseline. I then divide that by sessions, and further subdivide that by encounters.
It gets kind of funky if I go for fast progression (Which I like) where a low level character may get more xp than a higer level one, but it averages out eventually.
Overall, I have been able to jump back and forth depending upon the assumptions of the game. So I'll do gp=xp with OSR games, monster challenge = xp for other WotCs, CP for accomplishments or successful sessions for GURPS, or whatever else the game suggests (to a point, as explained in a bit).
The two main methods in various D&Ds are simple-- xp for collecting loot and or killing things (quantifiable reflections of 'reward for success,' since those two things are the things the characters were assumed to want to be doing). 2e AD&D tried to add a touch of Runequest (I believe, right?) methodology in there for doing things as well (xp for a spellcaster casting a spells, a fighter for defeating HD worth of enemies, etc.). And I think those were good decisions for the games, at the times they were made, and (most importantly) as the default rules to be included with the books. I am of the opinion that all ttrpg game rules are those things that you need while you are learning to play (/GM) the game, and that as you get better, you end up needing codified rules less and less. At that point, any GM worth their salt ought to be able to be able to reasonably determine whether an party of PCs--doing whatever they end up deciding to be doing--is doing it well and whether they deserve a reward. But you don't need rules for that in the book.
There's no grand theory on any of this. The concept of 'leveling up' or gaining xp (or character points in point-buy games, etc.) is a completely arbitrary game device that was included in (some of) the earliest games for no real grander reason than people generally enjoy it, and kept there because, again, people generally enjoy it. There's no real reason it should be a thing. Plenty of games don't even have the advancement-tied-to-some-measure-of-success mechanic, and work great without(including games like Star Trek, and Metamorphosis Alpha where you really don't have a direct award other than new allies, things, money, etc., or Traveller, where you get new equipment and or the money to keep on travelling, but otherwise are mostly exchanging lifespan for skill points, with no direct correlation to in-adventure success).
What's a milestone?
I use experience points using a homebrew system that compares difficulty to ability, and/or hours and/or success tallies, and/or GM discretion based on thinking about what the characters (NPCs too) have been doing and whether that would amount to them learning or developing abilities or not.
Because (as usual) I generally want the game to model a consistent game world where things happen consistently and make sense, more than I am interested in stories or gratifying addictions to continual substantial ability increase.
I do really like the idea that significant experiences should improve characters' relevant abilities significantly, but I am often questioning, experimenting, and reinventing ways to have that be satisfying and fun without inflating abilities too quickly, inconsistently, or excessively.
Quote from: Skarg;1002280What's a milestone?
There are variations on the idea, but keeping with the metaphor, they all involve some idea of there being a significant chunk of XP tied to reaching certain goals or achievements. For example, you don't get XP for killing the gate orcs, the guard room orcs, the bridge orcs, and then the boss orc. Or you don't get it for stealing their treasure. Instead, you get a big chunk of XP (possibly based on all the orcs, possibly based on their treasure, possibly something else, more likely approximated and rounded), for "putting an end to the orc threat" or "succeeding in your orc-complex objective" or whatever.
It's very similar to quest rewards in this respect. A true milestone system, however, is assigned when reaching some particular marker while pursuing a larger quest. That is, stealing the treasure from the boss orc and/or routing them is in service to a large goal. In effect, "XP for gold" is a kind of milestone variant that predates the wider concept.
Afaict a true milestone system is no xp, pcs level up at a certain point in the adventure or after x number sessions. Modern Paizo APs list points where the pcs are expected to level up.
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1002285There are variations on the idea, but keeping with the metaphor, they all involve some idea of there being a significant chunk of XP tied to reaching certain goals or achievements. For example, you don't get XP for killing the gate orcs, the guard room orcs, the bridge orcs, and then the boss orc. Or you don't get it for stealing their treasure. Instead, you get a big chunk of XP (possibly based on all the orcs, possibly based on their treasure, possibly something else, more likely approximated and rounded), for "putting an end to the orc threat" or "succeeding in your orc-complex objective" or whatever.
It's very similar to quest rewards in this respect. A true milestone system, however, is assigned when reaching some particular marker while pursuing a larger quest. That is, stealing the treasure from the boss orc and/or routing them is in service to a large goal. In effect, "XP for gold" is a kind of milestone variant that predates the wider concept.
This is how I undesrtand it too. Adding that "personal milestones" also exist (see
Keys in Lady Blackbird, or
Personal Milestones in Marvel Heroic, for eg.)
Quote from: S'mon;1002288Afaict a true milestone system is no xp, pcs level up at a certain point in the adventure or after x number sessions. Modern Paizo APs list points where the pcs are expected to level up.
Is that significantly different from the GM keeping track and telling you when you have accumulated enough success (however it is measured) to have leveled up?
Quote from: Willie the Duck;1002303Is that significantly different from the GM keeping track and telling you when you have accumulated enough success (however it is measured) to have leveled up?
In the campaigns I've played where the GM told us when we levelled, I think it would not have mattered if she or he had kept a secret tally. If we're not told our XP it feels arbitrary.
Quote from: S'mon;1002314In the campaigns I've played where the GM told us when we levelled, I think it would not have mattered if she or he had kept a secret tally. If we're not told our XP it feels arbitrary.
Fair enough.
I fell that this topic is actually two topics, artificially conflated. There is
1) presentation of reward - whether the players have access to their reward status, how close they are to leveling, knowing when they did something to get reward, and whether rewards are broken down in to XP, character points, or a more nebulous, "you've accomplished enough to level" or some such. And
2) what you get rewarded for - gold, monsters defeated, self-defined objectives, story/adventure objectives, good roleplay, etc.
Quote from: S'mon;1002288Afaict a true milestone system is no xp, pcs level up at a certain point in the adventure or after x number sessions. .
This seems to be the direction my current campaign is heading.
Quote from: Shemek hiTankolel;1002322This seems to be the direction my current campaign is heading.
On Tekumel that works quite well because of the baroque, elaborate social structure. There are plenty of in character rewards available.
It depends on the system, I think. In a class based system where classes have different leveling points like AD&D then I'd assume XP. In a game with a universal point chart like D20/PF I think XP isn't as necessary and milestones are fine. However, even then I think that minor and major milestones should be used so that smaller goals are still as important as larger ones.
Pathfinder adventure paths have recommended placed in each campaign where people should be as a certain level, but those are just guidelines. In my current game there are six people and since XP is shared from a pool, they are a little behind the recommended level.
Quote from: rgrove0172;1002112How would that be? If anything I would think the freedom of Sandbox would be enhanced by a system wherein the character's objectives and priorities determine their development rather than some arbitrary number of dead critters or coins in the pouch. If in your Sandbox they decide that they just HAVE to end the plot against Good King Nutcracker then that sounds like a great goal to mate with some XP, or even a level all its own. Dont you think?
That is a thought, the question is how does the GM evaluate the goal without investing his own preferences for outcome? One COULD envision a mechanic where the player indicates what THEY want the goal to be worth, and then the GM has a budget of that many points to throw obstacles. But is that actually a sandbox? It's an interesting idea.
There is one chap over on storygames.com who does give XP for player defined goals that is not just for killing or looted gold.
Frank
Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1002138What happens if the players fail? What happens if Good King Nutsack DOESN'T get put back on the throne? What happens if they are hunting down Celerus the Nutpuncher and decide to join him and his Squeaky Men instead?
Essentially, I'm opposed to anything that ties XP to something that's "supposed" to happen.
Absolutely agree with this.
So sure, maybe there's a better way than gold or killing to assign xp for goals, but it also can't be all or nothing (unless it really is all or nothing). In any case, let the players set goals. The GM can offer rumors and rewards to entice the players, but if they drop those on the floor and go for something else, the GM should be prepared to accommodate or state "hey, shooting innocent peasants is not the game I wanted to play" (i.e. talk as adults about what you like and dislike if there seems to be a disconnect).
Frank
Quote from: Shemek hiTankolel;1002139In my case I really don't use xp, as it traditionally is/was used in D&D, any more. I much prefer milestones these days, and will advance them a level based upon the set number of goals achieved. Most of my current Tekumel campaign is political intrigue, back room deals, etc. It's hard to assign an xp value for convincing someone to do this, or for hiring an assassin, or administering a beating to the sod who owes the clan money, etc... Normally, I decide when designing a specific scenario or "dungeon" what I feel the reward should be based upon its difficulty, relatively speaking, and how many goals they attain with regards to the "big overall picture" in my game. Some other things that I watch is how they interact with NPC's, do they play by the rules or are they running roughshod and alienating themselves and behaving in an ignoble manner -something very important in a setting like Tekumel where the notion of "face" is quite similar to what it would be in Japan. Going forward I probably will eventually eliminate xp altogether.
Shemek
I almost went down this path for a while. And now I'm back to OD&D xp for gold and killing... The problem I see is how to make the game about the players goals not the GM's goals.
Frank
I ran a Fantasy AGE game for a little bit where I used milestones. Have to admit that I wasn't comfortable with leveling done on my whim per se. Frank gives a really good take on this above^
I should add one thing I no longer like is any sort of "role playing bonus" or anything that smells of: "You get more xp if you play the way I think you should play." Now I guess if it's a group thing, it's more ok, though honestly, I'm not sure I still don't think it's problematical (here I'm thinking of the various artha awards in Burning Wheel like MVP and Embodiment). I guess if there is a consistent trend that one person gets more or less of those than others, then it's time to evaluate the group of players.
Frank
Quote from: ffilz;1002375That is a thought, the question is how does the GM evaluate the goal without investing his own preferences for outcome? One COULD envision a mechanic where the player indicates what THEY want the goal to be worth, and then the GM has a budget of that many points to throw obstacles. But is that actually a sandbox? It's an interesting idea.
Frank
When I did something similar (though my version was more "quest XP" than "milestone XP"), the setup was a sandbox where players could do anything they wanted. They'd get regular XP for overcoming creatures (however they did that). But they could also set goals. if they set a goal, I'd get back to them within a few days on what it was worth (in chunk XP). Most players had two or three active at once, but some ignored it. Though it wasn't that many goals, because often the goals they picked would be shared (and the XP divided upon success). Then in play the next time, they could still do whatever they wanted. Some goals had hard time limits, and some had softer limits. We had some thoughts about preventing abuse by limiting the goals, but never got far with that, because the players were good about picking something they were serious about doing.
Why we did it this way was that:
1. The chunk XP from goals was a little more generous and less risky overall than doing stuff the normal way. That is, I was fairly generous on setting the XP amounts for the goals, and correspondingly stingy on everything else. Once a player stated a goal, they had a vested interest in pursuing it.
2. This was our way of handling detailed preparation. You telegraph your goal, you get some fun stuff to interact with related to it. You make it up in the middle of the session, you get whatever the GM adjudicates on the fly or happened to have ready for the sandbox. These players liked prepared detail.
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1002381When I did something similar (though my version was more "quest XP" than "milestone XP"), the setup was a sandbox where players could do anything they wanted. They'd get regular XP for overcoming creatures (however they did that). But they could also set goals. if they set a goal, I'd get back to them within a few days on what it was worth (in chunk XP). Most players had two or three active at once, but some ignored it. Though it wasn't that many goals, because often the goals they picked would be shared (and the XP divided upon success). Then in play the next time, they could still do whatever they wanted. Some goals had hard time limits, and some had softer limits. We had some thoughts about preventing abuse by limiting the goals, but never got far with that, because the players were good about picking something they were serious about doing.
Why we did it this way was that:
1. The chunk XP from goals was a little more generous and less risky overall than doing stuff the normal way. That is, I was fairly generous on setting the XP amounts for the goals, and correspondingly stingy on everything else. Once a player stated a goal, they had a vested interest in pursuing it.
2. This was our way of handling detailed preparation. You telegraph your goal, you get some fun stuff to interact with related to it. You make it up in the middle of the session, you get whatever the GM adjudicates on the fly or happened to have ready for the sandbox. These players liked prepared detail.
That's a pretty reasonable way to handle it. I might allow for some negotiation, as much negotiation as would be reasonable if negotiating a cash reward. At that point, the goal award becomes an alternative to a gold reward where it really doesn't make sense in the game world to have a gold reward, yet as a group of players and GM, we agree this goal should be rewarded. And getting a better reward when you signal the GM what to prep is certainly not anathema to sandbox play. I think actually your idea is pretty close to what the guy over on storygames.com does.
Frank
XP for me
Quote from: Skarg;1002280What's a milestone?
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1002285There are variations on the idea, but keeping with the metaphor, they all involve some idea of there being a significant chunk of XP tied to reaching certain goals or achievements. For example, you don't get XP for killing the gate orcs, the guard room orcs, the bridge orcs, and then the boss orc. Or you don't get it for stealing their treasure. Instead, you get a big chunk of XP (possibly based on all the orcs, possibly based on their treasure, possibly something else, more likely approximated and rounded), for "putting an end to the orc threat" or "succeeding in your orc-complex objective" or whatever.
It's very similar to quest rewards in this respect. A true milestone system, however, is assigned when reaching some particular marker while pursuing a larger quest. That is, stealing the treasure from the boss orc and/or routing them is in service to a large goal. In effect, "XP for gold" is a kind of milestone variant that predates the wider concept.
I see. Thanks for the explanation. :)
Quote from: Xanther;1002443XP for me
Well guess I should clarify. I give xp for overcoming challenges, which includes combat as well as puzzles and riddles. I give xp for exploration, for example each room on the first level is worth 100 xp if just explored. Best idea ever. And xp for deeds/goals but pretty limited. Since I don't run murder-hobo games one deed reward I give is for prisoner rescue. Lastly I give xp for particularly risky individual action or a character acting according to their own personal idiom (in a way that brings no other benefit). I also give xp for interaction, parlay. Parlay can always be risky so you get xp for trying.
No xp for gold, you don't have to kill a monster to get xp just overcome it, be it by sneaking, tricking, bribes or sword. I always found xp for gold a poor proxy for xp for overcoming.
For us exploration, parlay and thinking of ways to overcome monsters without getting hurt have always been the fun of RPGs compared to war games or computer games.
Quote from: ffilz;1002377I almost went down this path for a while. And now I'm back to OD&D xp for gold and killing... The problem I see is how to make the game about the players goals not the GM's goals.
Frank
If gold and killing are your players goals then great. In my experience player goals have been about adventure, exploration and interaction with the game world. My changes in XP from ye ole 1979 are basically that rewarding what the players like to do. Those players who really like smiting foes still get xp and found over the years gold is always its own reward as it allows character advancement even if just thru gear and power in the game world. So everybody is happy.
I award XP for achieving the character's goals, and learning new things - you tell me which of those three it fits under, and we'll pretend I said that;)!
Quote from: AsenRG;1002517I award XP for achieving the character's goals, and learning new things - you tell me which of those three it fits under, and we'll pretend I said that;)!
I would say it's Milestones. But don't really know if the OP would agree. :D
Quote from: Itachi;1002521I would say it's Milestones. But don't really know if the OP would agree. :D
Milestone is a moving target depending upon the game and context. If you do an adventure path thing where you know the characters are going to go from level 5 to about level 10, then just bumping everyone's level up at particular points is a milestone system. But it's also a milestone system to reverse engineer the XP that would produce about that result, then give it in large chunks when appropriate spots in the adventure are reached, even if this doesn't cause a level bump. (Typically, this would make more sense in a system with a variety of XP charts and characters of different levels, such as AD&D.) Also however, it is hardly limited to adventure paths or even plotted adventurers. If there is a goal set by someone (GM or players, doesn't matter), and you get rewarded for making progress towards that goal separate from the individual activities involved, then that's a milestone variant.
The metaphor is fairly clear. You go on a journey. Doesn't matter what type or what you are doing. There are things that you do in particular where you might learn something (individual XP). Then there are mile markers on the way that indicate progress towards but not completion of the goal (milestones). Then there is reaching the goal (quest rewards). If using a milestone system, it's not uncommon to treat completion of the goals as just another milestone, but technically its different. (In practice, if the end of quest rewards are about the same as the milestones, the difference is not relevant.) Also, consider a GM using only individual XP supplemented by modest quest rewards. If the GM decides to hand out a part of the quest reward for partial completion at the end of each session, that's also a pseudo milestone reward--though an odd one, as the only "marker" for progress achieved towards the goal is the passage of a session.
As others have said, none of it matters once the group has a way that works for them. The patterns above are only usual for talking about getting to that point.
Great explanation, Steven. That's how I see it too.
Quote from: Itachi;1002521I would say it's Milestones. But don't really know if the OP would agree. :D
Milestone it is, then:D!
Milestones are pretty much just that, markers on a path, or milestones in the software Microsoft Project. They assume you are on a particular mission or have particular goals, and then you get XP if you reach those milestones. Usually they are related to a plot and/or 'side goals' related but not critical to the main goal/path/plot, etc.
Early Shadowrun modules were like this, giving a set amount of experience for accomplishing the mission, and then having additional experience based on how stealthy they were, or if they defeated or avoided major enemies, etc.
Aces & Eights has a system that is based on accomplishments, functioning as career goal milestones. If you are a miner, then you'll get experience for Purchasing Initial Equipment, Staking or Buying a Claim, Starting a Mining Operation, Hiring a Crew, Hitting a Vein, Mechanize Your Operation, Hitting the Motherlode, etc.
The problem with the milestone system is it requires something known to do beforehand. So if you're just exploring and come across bandits or orcs, what then? The characters have no mission, they have no plot they are following. You give a set XP award for the encounter, you're back to "XP for Killing". Sure, you could plan everything put beforehand I guess, there are 5 things in this forest worth finding worth A, B, C, D, E, 12 possible dangerous random encounters worth F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, then if they fully explore A, there's sub-rewards R, S, T, U, V, etc...
You almost spend more time defining milestones at that point then you do designing the forest.
Works great for GMs whose players are always have a clear, defined mission to follow.
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1002285It's very similar to quest rewards in this respect. A true milestone system, however, is assigned when reaching some particular marker while pursuing a larger quest. That is, stealing the treasure from the boss orc and/or routing them is in service to a large goal. In effect, "XP for gold" is a kind of milestone variant that predates the wider concept.
Seems that definition has changed?
All I've ever seen "milestone" referring to is Auto Levelling at key points in a campaign or adventure. Tyranny of Dragons has an Milestone as an optional. Over the course of Hoard of the Dragon Queen the PCs will level up 7 times. About once per what would previously have been a module or threes worth of adventure at the ends of each chapter except 5. Rise of Tiamat has 8 more milestone level ups so the PCs will around level 16 for the final battle and 17 if they survive. Though both modules have sections that can be totally bypassed so YLMV.
Quote from: Omega;1002888Seems that definition has changed?
All I've ever seen "milestone" referring to is Auto Levelling at key points in a campaign or adventure.
Yeah, until this thread I've only seen it used to mean "No XP, PCs level at this point in the adventure"
Quote from: S'mon;1002893Yeah, until this thread I've only seen it used to mean "No XP, PCs level at this point in the adventure"
The concept comes direct from project planning, and probably has entered gaming through multiple paths. It's entirely possible that the first and/or only references in published material is auto leveling, but the idea has been around as long as programmers have been playing D&D after coming home from work worrying about the Gantt chart. :)
CRKrueger, that's only a problem with story milestones. With personal milestones, though, what you're describing don't exist. See Marvel Heroic, Lady Blackbird, and PbtA games to see milestones that work on a open/sandbox environment.
For example, see the Wolverine one from Marvel Heroic a couple pages back. His milestones are related to his violent nature and what he does about it. Because of this, it's applicable in any situation the GM comes up. (Though it also works if the GM knows that beforehand and preps situations to test it, Pendragon/Sorcerer-wise)
As I go along, I'm more and more inclined to a very simple XP system where players mostly gain experience just for being in the session.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1003658As I go along, I'm more and more inclined to a very simple XP system where players mostly gain experience just for being in the session.
To what specific goal?
That's how I do it. I give 300 XP (in D&D 5e) as the minimum every session just for showing up, and then some more whenever they make progress towards a goal or defeat a boss, etc.
The reason being that I wanted to give players incentive to explore other ways of solving problems than just murdering every monster. It also lets them spend time roleplaying social and town stuff. Normally that would get them no XP.
Quote from: Willie the Duck;1003699To what specific goal?
That my players determine for themselves what it is their characters consider valuable to do or obtain.
I moved past the minutia tracking of XP about 15 years ago. For a while I used an "encounter point" system that awarded 1-4 points per encounter and required 25 ep to level. Now I mostly eyeball it and do something much akin to milestones or more simply "level per 3 sessions", slower at higher levels or if the players are dragging their feet.
Quote from: Nerzenjäger;1002219Probably the best, even if I don't get to use it often.
(https://i.imgur.com/D86lCvo.png)
*blinks* Where did that come from? That almost looks like my encounter point system I posted on ENWorld back in the day. Copying or great minds?
That's a neat system, although I think I'd steepen the curve and raise the points needed to improve significantly, so the tough encounters are more significant. Figuring out what counts as an encounter also seems significant and in some cases tricky to evenly assess with the points awarded like that.
XP per group (rather than per character) seems a bit generic and inaccurate to me. Different characters may have very different experiences during each event.
Quote from: Caesar Slaad;1004405I moved past the minutia tracking of XP about 15 years ago. For a while I used an "encounter point" system that awarded 1-4 points per encounter and required 25 ep to level. Now I mostly eyeball it and do something much akin to milestones or more simply "level per 3 sessions", slower at higher levels or if the players are dragging their feet.
*blinks* Where did that come from? That almost looks like my encounter point system I posted on ENWorld back in the day. Copying or great minds?
That's from DCC:).
I can't say whether copying was involved, but I've been using a similar system with slightly different requirements a decade before I saw DCC. The main difference has always been, I used it in systems where you don't gather XP to level up, but spend it directly on skills and attribute increases;).
1 in 10,000 people reaching level 5 seems pretty high actually, when you consider that it's supposed to be a rare level and how many people are out there.
There'd be tons of level 5s in NYC alone based on population.
Maybe it is just more common than I thought.
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;10044681 in 10,000 people reaching level 5 seems pretty high actually, when you consider that it's supposed to be a rare level and how many people are out there.
There'd be tons of level 5s in NYC alone based on population.
Maybe it is just more common than I thought.
NYC alone has greater population than many Western medieval kingdoms;).
Quote from: AsenRG;1004475NYC alone has greater population than many Western medieval kingdoms;).
At 1 in 10,000, medieval York has 1 5th level person, London has I think 5, all of England has something like 200.
Now, all those 200 might be in London where all the action is, so that could skew things.
Just for fun I ran the numbers for the United States, assuming that each level is 10x less likely. (ie, 1 in 100 reaches level 2, 1 in 1,000 reaches level 3, 1 in 10,000 reaches level 4, etc.)
The total population is roughly 300 million; when we only look at adults, it's 246 million.
Level 1: 24,600,000 (10%)
Level 2: 2,460,000 (1%)
Level 3: 246,000 (.1%)
Level 4: 24,600 (.01%)
Level 5: 2,460 (.001%)
Level 6: 246 (.0001%)
Level 7: 24 (.00001%)
Level 8: 2 (.000001%)
I guess Trump and Hillary are level 8.
As long as it is a somewhat objective way to measure advancement, either one works for me.
Levelling up whenever the GM feels it is appropiate has that faint smell of railroading.
Although DnDs 4 digit xp tracking is a bit unnecessary imo.
The ACKS demographics works for me. Excerpting:
1/20 at level 1
1/1000 at level 5
1/160k at level 10
1/10M at level 14 (system maximum)
A village will have a scattering of 1st and 2nd level characters; maybe a couple of 3rd.
The count will be 7th to 9th level, with a couple of 6th-7th level characters in their train or in other centers of power; their barons will typically be 5th level.
Over 10th level we're talking kings and similarly-powerful characters.
Given this and a distribution of classes it's easy for me to come up with a few reasonably-leveled interesting characters in any community.
They earn xp based on the activities they attempt or complete. Kill some monsters they get xp for killing them. Break into the manor instead of fighting their way through they get some xp for that.
Yeah, the DCC method is very good. In actual play it boils down to "give 1-4xp per encounter". No muss or fuss.
Quote from: AsenRG;1004475NYC alone has greater population than many Western medieval kingdoms;).
Heh, you're lowballing it. Metro New York, at just over 20 million residents, is more populous than ANY European realm in the whole medieval era.
Quote from: Ravenswing;1005090Heh, you're lowballing it. Metro New York, at just over 20 million residents, is more populous than ANY European realm in the whole medieval era.
Indeed, it was deliberate understatement:). If it wasn't for China and maybe India, I wouldn't have even needed the "European" disclaimer, either!