Why I dislike Milestone XP

[5ekyu]

The character doesn't have to be moving toward a goal, but the party as a whole does. Milestones are party-level, not character-level. If the party spends several sessions chasing down the wizard's personal nemesis, they all level up, not just the wizard.

Also, nobody is required to set a goal. I will supply plot hooks for anybody who wants them. You can pursue my prefab goals, or invent your own, and I'm fine either way. What I don't want is a party that spends the entire session faffing around in town doing nothing in particular. I find that excruciatingly boring. Players who want to do that should find themselves another DM.

(And I might add that such a party will be punished just as hard by any other advancement scheme. XP-for-kills and XP-for-gold are not generous to whoso faffeth around in town.)

Party wnats to blow off a night carousing in town...great. Can be magnificent time to introduce characters, hooks, etc and help them get more invested.

Or, if its not that, it can be "ok, so you had a fun night and lots of fun was had... Now..."

As for equally punished... Session advancement does not equally punish this. You would advance regardless.

In my game, for instance, a session spent carousing around Auridon would be the same advancement as one chasing down leads and goals... Both hopefully fun... But each would have substantially differenr in-game results.

 

[Oofta]

Agreed. That is a bad perception to have in my view, especially if you know what you have to do to get the reward.

Right. You have to be a murder hobo.

 

[Oofta]

I dont see lack of reward as a penalty. If I have something and you dont that is not a penalty, a penalty would be if I take something from you.

I also have no problem with the idea that players who take more risk earning more reward. That just seems logical to me. Which could explain why I never got to games like Call of Cthulhu which penalises players that take risk.

And again...the implication is that in order to advance as a PC you have to kill things. Sometimes the riskiest thing is to go into enemy territory and try to negotiate peace. Which in most games (not all of course) will net you 0 XP.

If that's what you want, more power to you.

 

[GameOgre]

Xp Awards for Defeating things is a big part of my games. You gain just as much XP from killing something as sneaking by it or negotiating with it so that it doesn't hinder you.
Xp Awards for Social dealings are a big part of my game. Typically because social encounters take a lot more time they receive a greater XP amount IF the pc's efforts pan out.
Xp Awards for Discovery are a part of my game. This part is less than the others but I do reward the player characters for discovering new locations.

*Xp awards for Role Playing are hit and miss. If a PC role plays his character when it would be better if he didn't(the uncouth Fighter tells the duchess she is hot because that's just how he is) then they do gain a pretty hefty amount.

 

[Shasarak]

And again...the implication is that in order to advance as a PC you have to kill things. Sometimes the riskiest thing is to go into enemy territory and try to negotiate peace. Which in most games (not all of course) will net you 0 XP.

If that's what you want, more power to you.

It will net you 0 XP and a great RP experience for 0 risk. I have no problem with that.

 

[iserith]

Right. You have to be a murder hobo.

Choosing to engage in combat challenges does not make one a "murder hobo." You have to be also impoverished.

But seriously, it's fair to say "I wish that the game rewarded other things..." I don't think it's fair to call lack of a reward a penalty. You presumably knew what you had to do to get XP. You chose not to do that. Take responsibility for your choices.

 

[iserith]

*Xp awards for Role Playing are hit and miss. If a PC role plays his character when it would be better if he didn't(the uncouth Fighter tells the duchess she is hot because that's just how he is) then they do gain a pretty hefty amount.

I think Inspiration is best for a reward when a player portrays his or her character in a way consistent with established traits. A fighter with a flaw along the lines of "I come off as uncouth at the worst times..." might get Inspiration for doing what you suggest. This way everything is spelled out and the player of the fighter knows concretely what he or she must do to get the reward. I find, in my experience, "roleplaying XP" is handled a bit to "squishy" for my tastes - it's like getting XP for entertaining the DM. Okay for some, just not my cup of tea. Plus that's a particular definition of "roleplaying" with which I don't agree, but that's a separate matter.

 

[Caliban]

It will net you 0 XP and a great RP experience for 0 risk. I have no problem with that.

Because people only learn from their experiences if their life is at risk.

 

[Oofta]

Choosing to engage in combat challenges does not make one a "murder hobo." You have to be also impoverished.

But seriously, it's fair to say "I wish that the game rewarded other things..." I don't think it's fair to call lack of a reward a penalty. You presumably knew what you had to do to get XP. You chose not to do that. Take responsibility for your choices.

Right. Instead of seeking alliances and attempting to find out more about what was going on to try to minimize casualties of innocent people we should have just kicked down the door and taken out everything in sight. Kill 'em all and let the gods sort it out. Instead of attempting to make a neutral party an ally we could have just wiped them out. Yeah XP!

 

[iserith]

Right. Instead of seeking alliances and attempting to find out more about what was going on to try to minimize casualties of innocent people we should have just kicked down the door and taken out everything in sight. Kill 'em all and let the gods sort it out. Instead of attempting to make a neutral party an ally we could have just wiped them out. Yeah XP!

Let's be clear here: I have no criticism of your criticism that the particular game you were playing did not give XP for "seeking alliance and attempting to find out more about what was going on to try to minimize casualties of innocent people." Maybe it should have. But it didn't, apparently.

My criticism of your statement is that you see a lack of reward as a penalty when you presumably knew what you needed to do to get the reward. That's a weak argument worth abandoning in my view.