Getting to 6 encounters in a day

[Oofta]

This thread is all about opinions and preferences. I know I'm a sarcastic SOB so if something I've written insulted you, I apologize. But there's several things in your response that are either meant as insults or simply make no sense.

That sounds awfully meta-game-y, to be honest; it's like you're rewarding the player for contributing, rather than awarding the character based on what they experience. Why would the character learn the same amount about fighting from standing on a roof and mowing down zombies with fire bolt, as they would from getting down there and wading through the horde with their longsword? The latter would be a much more intensive workout, where they're forced to get better because their life is on the line.

I'm following basic concept of D&D that overcoming obstacles is how our characters grow. That if they overcome 8 encounters/obstacles they get X XP. I don't care how they overcome the obstacles, what order they do them in, how long it takes, anything. How is anything I've said me-game-y? People learn from experience. We measure that experience as XP which we grant for successfully completing an encounter.

If they can figure out how to get on the roof and mow down the zombies and don't rush into the middle of the horde for no reason whatsoever, why does it matter? They came up with a solution that worked. They may have turned what I thought would be a difficult encounter into a relatively easy one. Good for them. Why would I punish them (or withhold rewards) for not playing the way I want them to play?

I may even grant inspiration if it's a solution that is particularly appropriate for the character (more on inspiration below).

Only if you care about gaining levels. Why would you even care about getting better at fighting, if you never get into challenging fights in the first place?

What I object to is that you're saying if they overcome 8 encounters/obstacles without a long rest they get bonus XP. So they get X + Y XP. Where does that additional XP come from? You can justify it after the fact, but the only reason to award bonus XP IMHO is to get them to do more encounters than they normally would.

As the DM, it's not my place to challenge anyone. I build the world. I play the NPCs. I adjudicate action resolution. I most certainly would never rely on meta-game mechanics at any point.

Huh? You just said they have to get into challenging fights. I also fundamentally disagree. It is very much my job as a DM to help tell an interesting story. Part of that is having some challenging encounters; if every encounter is a cakewalk it's boring. I don't want bored players.

One thing that comes close to the "carrot" of bonus XP in D&D official rules is inspiration. You can justify it after the fact, but there's no in-game-world reason a PC should be extra-lucky for being themselves. The reward is for the player, not the PC. I guess that may be part of the reason why I don't use it very often.

But just to summarize, I think bonus XP for extra encounters is a solution looking for a problem. There are many ways to give my players a fun, engaging, and yes, challenging game without it that don't rely on rewards for the players. I dislike any house rule that basically tells the players "play the way I want you to play, change your character's motivations to be what I want them to be, or you don't get any cookies".

 

[iserith]

I dislike any house rule that basically tells the players "play the way I want you to play, change your character's motivations to be what I want them to be, or you don't get any cookies".

It doesn't say that though. It says "Here are some cookies for overcoming that challenge. If you want more cookies plus some bonus cookies on top of that, keep overcoming challenges this adventuring day. Or not. It's up to you." Compare with the method you say you employ which is "It's not up to you when you get cookies - I'll give you some cookies when I feel like it."

 

[Oofta]

It doesn't say that though. It says "Here are some cookies for overcoming that challenge. If you want more cookies plus some bonus cookies on top of that, keep overcoming challenges this adventuring day. Or not. It's up to you."

Wait, so you're not giving out cookies, but you are giving out cookies which means you are not withholding cookies but you could get more cookies but .... my brain hurts.

If you like this idea use it. Don't try to justify it, don't say "I'm not withholding rewards, I'm just withholding rewards" BS. It's a reward for players playing a certain style of character. Just admit it and move on. Just like inspiration.

Compare with the method you say you employ which is "It's not up to you when you get cookies - I'll give you some cookies when I feel like it."

I've never said that for games that use XP. Using milestone advancement or a variation of it is a whole other topic.

It has nothing to do with whether or not you get XP for defeating those goblins the next cave over. Defeating those goblins to get XP is core to D&D.

The issue I have is that you get less XP for the exact same encounter unless you do it when and in the way the DM wants you to do it. If the goblins in the next cave over need defeating and as a DM you want to challenge your players by not giving the PCs a chance to rest then give the PCs an in-world reason to not wait until they've had a long rest. It's not hard, I do it all the time.

This tactic gives the players a reason, not the PCs. If the players want the bonus XP they may have to retroactively change their character concept. I dislike that whole concept.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Hiya.

I did NOT read the whole thread, so if this has been mentioned upstream, sorry.

WARNING!! Semi-Rant cause by flare up of Grognardia Curmudgeonitis! For those that don't want to read: "It's not a system problem...it's a DM problem" is the gist of it all.

>>>>

^_^

Paul L. Ming (...STILL a "Killer DM"...I guess...)

Heh... well, that's certainly one way to go about it.

 

[iserith]

Wait, so you're not giving out cookies, but you are giving out cookies which means you are not withholding cookies but you could get more cookies but .... my brain hurts.

If you like this idea use it. Don't try to justify it, don't say "I'm not withholding rewards, I'm just withholding rewards" BS. It's a reward for players playing a certain style of character. Just admit it and move on. Just like inspiration.

It's a reward for engaging in certain challenges. I don't now what you're on about with withholding rewards. The parameters for receiving the XP and bonus XP are set forth. It's on the players to pursue it, if they wish. That's how standard XP works.

I've never said that for games that use XP. Using milestone advancement or a variation of it is a whole other topic.

You said you level up the PCs when it feels right for the story. So, you give out cookies when you feel like it. The players may have some say in the beginning of the campaign as to how fast they want to advance, but you decide ultimately. Contrast with the proposed method where experience is accrued as normal, but if you do a little more today, you get a cumulative bonus. It's in the players' and therefore the characters' hands.

It has nothing to do with whether or not you get XP for defeating those goblins the next cave over. Defeating those goblins to get XP is core to D&D.

The issue I have is that you get less XP for the exact same encounter unless you do it when and in the way the DM wants you to do it. If the goblins in the next cave over need defeating and as a DM you want to challenge your players by not giving the PCs a chance to rest then give the PCs an in-world reason to not wait until they've had a long rest. It's not hard, I do it all the time.

In other words, the stick of consequences for failing to do what the DM wanted instead of a carrot that encourages them to press on (but it's okay if they don't want to).

This tactic gives the players a reason, not the PCs. If the players want the bonus XP they may have to retroactively change their character concept. I dislike that whole concept.

You keep saying that it "gives the players a reason, not the PCs" as if there's necessarily a disconnect there. As for character concept, if you're going into a game where you know you can get bonus XP for overcoming a number of challenges past a certain benchmark, why in the world would you create a character that was dead set against it? Especially if you think about things the way you do?

 

[Oofta]

It's a reward for engaging in certain challenges. I don't now what you're on about with withholding rewards. The parameters for receiving the XP and bonus XP are set forth. It's on the players to pursue it, if they wish. That's how standard XP works.



You said you level up the PCs when it feels right for the story. So, you give out cookies when you feel like it. The players may have some say in the beginning of the campaign as to how fast they want to advance, but you decide ultimately. Contrast with the proposed method where experience is accrued as normal, but if you do a little more today, you get a cumulative bonus. It's in the players' and therefore the characters' hands.



In other words, the stick of consequences for failing to do what the DM wanted instead of a carrot that encourages them to press on (but it's okay if they don't want to).



You keep saying that it "gives the players a reason, not the PCs" as if there's necessarily a disconnect there. As for character concept, if you're going into a game where you know you can get bonus XP for overcoming a number of challenges past a certain benchmark, why in the world would you create a character that was dead set against it? Especially if you think about things the way you do?

I will grant XP when and if they defeat the goblins. I'm just not going to force or reward them for doing it the way I want.

Milestone advancement is a different topic and irrelevant to this conversation.

There's nothing new here. I have an opinion, you disagree. So be it.

 

[OB1]

If you really want to force players into the daily XP budget, why not force it.

You gain rest points after an encounter equal to the adjusted xp for the encounter.

Once you gain RP equal to 1/3 your levels daily Adventuring XP budget, you gain the benefits of a short rest. You gain this again when you gain RP equal to 2/3 your daily XP budget.

Once you gain RP equal to your daily XP budget, you gain the benefits of a long rest.

You still need to take a one hour rest to spend HD.

You still need to take an 8 hour rest to remove exhaustion and regain spent HD.

You also gain the benefits of a short rest if you rest 8 hours without having to take a watch and without being interrupted by combat.

You also gain the benefits of a long rest if you spend one week without a combat encounter and don’t travel more than 2 hours per day.

 

[iserith]

I will grant XP when and if they defeat the goblins. I'm just not going to force or reward them for doing it the way I want.

Milestone advancement is a different topic and irrelevant to this conversation.

Milestone advancement uses XP and awards it when the PCs achieve designated goals, complete quests, or when certain events occur. Story-based advancement awards levels for accomplishing significant goals in the campaign. It is relevant to this conversation to point out that your objection to an XP incentive for doing a particular thing is strange because the other methods are not meaningfully different since player and therefore character behaviors are incentivized by milestone or story-based advancement. They are all rewards for doing particular things.

There's nothing new here. I have an opinion, you disagree. So be it.

You have an opinion based on objections that are continually knocked down, but you keep standing them up as if someone hasn't already addressed them fully.

 

[Oofta]

Milestone advancement uses XP and awards it when the PCs achieve designated goals, complete quests, or when certain events occur. Story-based advancement awards levels for accomplishing significant goals in the campaign. It is relevant to this conversation to point out that your objection to an XP incentive for doing a particular thing is strange because the other methods are not meaningfully different since player and therefore character behaviors are incentivized by milestone or story-based advancement. They are all rewards for doing particular things.

I reward players for PCs achieving goals. I don't care how those goals are achieved and whether or not they are achieved the way I want them to be achieved.

You have an opinion based on objections that are continually knocked down, but you keep standing them up as if someone hasn't already addressed them fully.

So in other words, my opinion doesn't count because I disagree with you.

Right.

 

[iserith]

I reward players for PCs achieving goals. I don't care how those goals are achieved and whether or not they are achieved the way I want them to be achieved.

So you're incentivizing them to achieve goals. Forcing them to play characters who achieve goals. Or forcing their aimless characters to pursue goals which may go against their concept. You're withholding rewards unless they achieve goals.

So in other words, my opinion doesn't count because I disagree with you.

Right.

I don't care if you like the mechanic or not, truly. My argument is not with your opinion, but with the specific objections you are providing which are easily addressed.