Why I dislike Milestone XP

[Sunseeker]

Even so I have a heavy dislike for it. See to me D&D is a role playing game and the PC's should have the freedom to play their characters however they want. This means that the DM shouldn't have preset notions and rewards for doing what the adventure requires.

I'm not here to be your Xbox. Being DM takes time and prep and ya know, WORK. So if I set down after taking that time and prep and work and the player's response is "Hey we're gonna go kick chickens for 4 hours." You can find another DM.

If the pc's decide that Dragon flying over the town looks nasty and head the other way then they should have the freedom to do so.

I am SO ANGRY right now and this just PISSES ME OFF.

You know why there's a pretend dragon flying over your pretend heads in your pretend town? Because the DM set down beforehand and said "Hey, you know what the players might have fun dealing with, a dragon? I mean, it's in the name of the game right?" So for you to sit there and act like this isn't somehow part of the DM's plan for things for you to deal with absolutely infuriates me.

Adventure paths in general are horrible for just that reason. The adventurers lives shouldn't be set and railroaded only on the path the DM sets before them. Also if you were going to build a adventure path and get player buy in why not actually make it work? Why not make the adventure actually contain the amount of XP needed to level instead of just a fraction of it? BAH!

Adventures aren't sandboxes because they're probably about 50 pages long. You can't put infinite content into that. Jesus this is like Grade-A ignorance of game design 101.

My players love to track their xp and levels and feel a since of accomplishment with their characters when they earn a level up and are not simply given a level up because the adventure requires them to be higher.

Okay. Lots of people like different things.

Is it really all that hard to award xp? I'm amazed that DM's can build encounters and entire settings and yet balk at the simple task of awarding xp for monsters slain,role playing,creative thinking and good gaming.

What we balk at is players being disrespectful and acting like we are their personal entertainment systems who must bend to their every ridiculous desire.

One of my player tells me player freedom is simply gone from the game in favor of the amusement park get on here and get off over there style of of play and while it might be more rare surely there are a lot of DM's out there like me that don't run there games that way.

Right?

WRONG.

 

[flametitan]

2. Saison Advancement. XP for buying the DM slightly fruity beers. [This one is a personal favorite].

Is this 1 XP per penny spent, or 1 XP for every dollar?

 

[Immoralkickass]

I actually started with Milestone leveling before moving on to the standard XP gains. My DM somehow preferred XP. But its not like you can't mix the two; my DM did instantly push us from level 9 to 10 for the final session of the season. We will be starting season 2 at level 11.

Milestone does provide the DM with absolute control over the players progress, and it can be abused. I heard a story of a player who was level 3 after playing for one whole year of weekly playing. When I asked how long he was at level 1, he said 4 months. I nearly spit out my coffee.

 

[GameOgre]

shidaku

I'm not here to be your Xbox. Being DM takes time and prep and ya know, WORK. So if I set down after taking that time and prep and work and the player's response is "Hey we're gonna go kick chickens for 4 hours." You can find another DM.

DMing should be fun and not work. If you don't enjoy it don't do it. My players are not there for me to tell them what fun is. They tell me what their characters want to do and I build (sometimes on the fly) a adventure for them. Will things turn out like they thought? Maybe ..maybe not. Beleive it or not if you give players a little freedom they will often end up creating their own epic story better than anything you could have pre-thought up. Your idea that they would want to stand around kicking chickens underscores your issue.

If the pc's decide that Dragon flying over the town looks nasty and head the other way then they should have the freedom to do so.
I am SO ANGRY right now and this just PISSES ME OFF.

You should not post when your so upset I am however sorry your got upset that is not my goal in the least.

You know why there's a pretend dragon flying over your pretend heads in your pretend town? Because the DM set down beforehand and said "Hey, you know what the players might have fun dealing with, a dragon? I mean, it's in the name of the game right?" So for you to sit there and act like this isn't somehow part of the DM's plan for things for you to deal with absolutely infuriates me.

I don't care to play a game to be a part of someones else's plan. I don't expect my players to either. How about You try to just inform them of whats going on and give them meaningful choices and let THEM TELL YOU what they want to do? Sure it takes a little more effort at first and perhaps a little more skill to do it well, but the end result is a game that moves in ways no one expected! Best of all the players get to plan and think and set their own goals. If you tell them pirates have been attacking up and down the coast and the mayor wants to hire them to hunt the pirates down but instead the players want to up and leave and head back to check on some other adventure hook from three sessions ago....LET THEM! The pirate's can become more of a scourge and the next time the pc's come that way maybe they find a sacked town! Meanwhile you can use that old adventure hook from three sessions ago that they ignored and now it has grown even bigger!

Adventures aren't sandboxes because they're probably about 50 pages long. You can't put infinite content into that. Jesus this is like Grade-A ignorance of game design 101.

I just glanced at one of the adventure paths paths. 256 pages. The first 5 or 6 levels is only a few pages because you are supposed to just run them through it fast and give them tons of unearned XP so they are high enough for the rest of the adventure path. Why not just make the adventure path 6-12th level instead on 1-12th and crapping out a silly 6 levels in 3 seconds flat? It seems to be a much better way to do adventure design.

What we balk at is players being disrespectful and acting like we are their personal entertainment systems who must bend to their every ridiculous desire.

Wow! A player wanting to use XP for advancement is disrespectful and acting like you are a game system? Man, sounds like you have been through the ringer of late and maybe having a hard time. If so please understand that every DM has been in that same spot from time. Sometimes it's just our awesome epic adventure fell flat, sometimes its we don't mesh with out players and sometimes it can even be we are dealing with problem players or even our own issues are clouding our judgment. Sometimes it might just be that we failed to read the fine print on a monster and forgot to use its special ability that would have made it a epic fight and instead the party one rounded it 8) and it was out big bad!

Whatever is going on plenty of folks here have been through it and could offer some good advice( and maybe a little bad advice as well! )

Edited to remove the snarky unhelpful comment at the end because it wasn't helpful and wasn't what i was really trying to say.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

<snipped for space>

It sounds like you've been DMing for too many players that don't mesh with your style. I say that because you are coming off as believing that the players not taking the hooks you've planned out is a personal disrespect to you and your efforts as a DM... where I, and possibly many other DMs, would simply see that as having chosen the wrong hook for the players in question (i.e. one they aren't into, and it's totally okay for people to be into different things) or otherwise not at all a problem because there are more hooks to toss them and see which they'll take.

It's like you are saying either you get your way and the campaign goes to plan and you have fun, or the players try to take the lead and shape the campaign and you don't have fun - if you were playing with a compatible group of players, the outcome would be everyone having fun whether the player's took your lead or you took theirs, because you'd be all intentionally be heading to the same place.

Or maybe you just need to cut back how much prep-time you spend so that you aren't so emotionally invested in a dragon flying over town that you get angry if the players don't feel like dealing with a dragon at the moment, because as GameOgre says, DMing should be fun, not work.

 

[JonnyP71]

So someone explain the more constraining concept of milestones that people are railing against?

I've played in 2 games where the DM has used Milestone xp, or rather milestone levelling, as xp has not existed as we know it.

At the end of a 'chapter' of the game the DM has simply said - 'you have all gained a level'. There's no differentiation between characters that have been present for all the sessions of the chapter and those that have maybe only been in the party for 1 or 2 sessions.

It is lazy, it is forced, it's a clumsy way of keeping everyone at the same level.

It just doesn't 'feel' remotely right to me.

 

[Imaculata]

Or maybe you just need to cut back how much prep-time you spend so that you aren't so emotionally invested in a dragon flying over town that you get angry if the players don't feel like dealing with a dragon at the moment, because as GameOgre says, DMing should be fun, not work.

I guess it depends on whether the campaign revolves around killing the dragon. If the dragon is just a plothook, but not the entire goal of the campaign, then I see no issue with the players completely ignoring it. If however the campaign is about killing said dragon, and the players agreed to play that campaign, then that seems like something to discuss with your players.

I currently run a sandbox campaign, in which the players have complete freedom to do as they like, as long as it is within the confines of the region that I've prepared for them. That last part is something I agreed upon with my group. I told them: "This is the setting, and this is the region in which we play. Although there is obviously far more world beyond the confines of the map, this is the region in which I want to restrict this campaign (but it may be expanded later on)". With this minor restriction agreed upon by my players, we've had no issues what so ever, because everyone is on the same page. I also discussed with them the goal of the campaign, and towards what kind of ending I'm hoping to steer it eventually (a huge naval battle of some sort). I explained to them that the campaign could easily take them to high level, or maybe even epic level if we continue playing it, but that there is also an ending that I have in mind for it.

And that's all you need really. As long as everyone understands what kind of campaign you're running, then its all good. If you expect your players to follow the plot hooks, then you should make it clear to them that they are playing a linear campaign.

On milestone xp

I'm not a fan of it to be honest. I understand the convenience of it, but it feels less earned when my character just gains an instant level at the end of a quest. I like earning bonus exp with killing high level monsters, and from good role playing, because it feels like we as players are being rewarded for our efforts. I like it when the DM does not know if the exp from an encounter will level up our characters or not, because I like being surprised as a player when we either barely reach the next level (or not). It creates anticipation and a feeling of accomplishment.

Take for example our last session, where the players managed to beat a very large battle. Not only did the xp level up their characters, but it took them pretty far towards their next level as well. And so it feels like all that effort is reflected in the exp.

 

[KenNYC]

D&D should go back to XP for GP. I know it doesn't make sense from a logic standpoint but it promotes good gameplay because there is a constant incentive to adventure, and also a very real incentive to be wise in choosing your fights. Just awarding xp for fighting sort of demands a party attack everything, but there is something to be said for discretion and valor. It also allows things like charisma and charm, or just plain old role playing, to have a decent impact on what happens.

The more I play 5e the more I see the wisdom of 1e and OD&D. I also don't see the advantage of every class advancing equally. With all due respect to circus performers, pickpockets and slick talkers, a 20th level wizard learning how to stop time and grant wishes should have to work a lot harder to get there than say a 20th level rogue.

Milestone xp seems a little railroady. Suppose I am not interested in your milestone and want to take my character in a different direction? Or what if I turn left instead of right?

 

[JonnyP71]

XP for GP actually makes quite a lot of sense if you use some form of downtime/training level advancement.

It just needs a slight mindshift away from 'you get better at adventuring due to your experiences' and towards 'you get better at adventuring because you pay someone who is more skilled than you to teach you'.

 

[Imaculata]

I also don't see the advantage of every class advancing equally. With all due respect to circus performers, pickpockets and slick talkers, a 20th level wizard learning how to stop time and grant wishes should have to work a lot harder to get there than say a 20th level rogue.

To me, D&D is all about team work. So if the entire party receives group exp, then the rules and the reward cycle support the idea of teamwork; everyone works towards the collective exp pool.

To me the warrior that kills a dragon, helps his party just as much as the rogue who gathers important information at the local tavern. And so both contribute to the party's exp pool.

I guess it all comes down to what sort of atmosphere you're aiming for in your campaign. Are the players a team, or are they individuals?