Why I dislike Milestone XP

[iserith]

But when presented with a choice between killing someone and negotiating with them, you naturally choose to fight because that is how you get XP and magic items.

I see killing as a form of negotiating that goes 100% my way.

I think many DMs under-utilize the guidelines for non-combat challenges. In my current campaign, you get XP for combat or social and exploration is where you get treasure (usually).

 

[Caliban]

I see killing as a form of negotiating that goes 100% my way.

I think many DMs under-utilize the guidelines for non-combat challenges. In my current campaign, you get XP for combat or social and exploration is where you get treasure (usually).

Thank you for proving my point.

 

[iserith]

Thank you for proving my point.

Do you mean in regards to how I see killing? As a player, I like getting into fights regardless of the advancement method because I like tactical combat. It's nice when my bloodlust is rewarded though!

 

[Warpiglet]

Do you mean in regards to how I see killing? As a player, I like getting into fights regardless of the advancement method because I like tactical combat. It's nice when my bloodlust is rewarded though!

Hell yeah! Its at least 50% of why we play! Mysteries and exploration are cool too.

I think part of this discussion hinges on the relative importance placed on creation of story vs. playing of a game. In our group it has just never been an issue. We get into it, make decisions and then go for it! Sometimes we run, sometimes we talk, sometimes we fight. And we enjoy fighting...

I recently gave experience for the avoidance of a large tactically unsound fight. My rationale is simple: what does experience represent? In very abstracted form, I think it represents skill at overcoming challenges in the adventuring environment. How you do it is not particularly important to me as long as there is some metric for the difficulty.

In the scenario I mention, it would have been a tough fight--fatal if no tactics were used. (Does anyone do that anyway?). Conversely, the party could choose a choke point or try to piecemeal the bigger force by sneaking past some of it and attacking the leaders.

They chose the latter. Why not reward the better choice?

It just does not seem hard to me to make this call. Nor is it less immersive...and each choice had some risk...so its not a gimme either...

 

[Fanaelialae]

But when presented with a choice between killing someone and negotiating with them, you naturally choose to fight because that is how you get XP and magic items.

That's only true if you reward players exclusively for combat rather than social encounters.

In a previous campaign, my druid encountered some kind of Earth fey with an interesting looking magic pipe. While I could have just beaten him down and taken it, that character was a nice guy and therefore wouldn't do that. We talked, and not only was my druid able to convince the fey to trade his pipe (I think it was in exchange for some gems) but he also taught my druid to wildshape into a statue. I got XP for the encounter, the magic pipe, and a cool new trick. While I could have gotten the first two by going all murder hobo, I would have lost out on the third. The reward was actually better because I chose the diplomatic approach. As an added bonus, I felt that I had real agency in the world, since my character was able to take an uncertain encounter and make a new friend.

 

[iserith]

That's only true if you reward players exclusively for combat rather than social encounters.

In a previous campaign, my druid encountered some kind of Earth fey with an interesting looking magic pipe. While I could have just beaten him down and taken it, that character was a nice guy and therefore wouldn't do that. We talked, and not only was my druid able to convince the fey to trade his pipe (I think it was in exchange for some gems) but he also taught my druid to wildshape into a statue. I got XP for the encounter, the magic pipe, and a cool new trick. While I could have gotten the first two by going all murder hobo, I would have lost out on the third. The reward was actually better because I chose the diplomatic approach. As an added bonus, I felt that I had real agency in the world, since my character was able to take an uncertain encounter and make a new friend.

"...after I got the item and learned the new trick, I beat him to death with his own magic pipe and double-dipped in his XP. Good times."

 

[Fanaelialae]

"...after I got the item and learned the new trick, I beat him to death with his own magic pipe and double-dipped in his XP. Good times."

Murderhobo

 

[Gardens & Goblins]

A character can only use so many magical items at a given time...

... and their army of loyal adventure pals, gained through their long travels can collectively make use of so many more.

Lawful Good Social Gods - they run things around here. Around everywhere!

 

[The Human Target]

In a game where there is no cost to combat - you're definitely going to win, and any damage you take will be removed after a nap - getting rid of combat XP means that playing through the combat is just a huge waste of time at the table. When there's no positive or negative consequence to combat, fighting is entirely meaningless.

I would be much more accepting of milestone-based XP if the healing rules were changed such that HP recovery was severely limited. It would mean the correct choice is to avoid combat whenever possible, because there's no real reward and the potential resource cost is high, but that's a fine way to play. (Likewise under default 5E rules, you should seek out every fight because there's no real cost and high potential rewards, and that's an alright way to play if you're into that sort of thing.)

I'm beginning to think you might not like the 5e healing rules.

 

[Shiroiken]

I am not a fan of non-XP leveling variants, but part of that is my enjoyment of a sandbox environment. Milestones work well for adventure paths, because it guarantees the party is the right level at the right time, but that's about it. I tried the XP per session, but that can reward the wrong behavior (taking longer to complete an adventure to level before the end). The idea of just giving out a level whenever I feel like it is just anathema to me.

The only thing I don't like about XP, at least since 3E, is that it is primarily awarded for killing stuff. In my current game I've cut the XP for monsters by half, and grant XP for exploration and social encounters, plus successfully completing adventures (i.e. quest XP). This rewards characters for overcoming non-combat obstacles, and does not punish characters for avoiding fights. In addition, successfully completing the adventure is worth a good chunk, which rewards perseverance.