D&D General XP Awards for -- what????

[pointofyou]

Do you think the game loses something in some ways? Like, you’re headed toward a big conflict and the GM decides you guys better level up before hand.

Are there things that show up in some games that don't show up in the games my friend runs? Yes. Those things mostly center around tracking and calculating XP and we do not miss those things. I did say that sometimes leveling up happens before the relevant inflection point if the DM believes it'll improve the chances of survival. That is not a thing that has proven to be disruptive in play for us.

 

[Lanefan]

You completely misread that then. I dont want to be "told" anything.

Exactly, engaging the game and finding the right path is what I'm after.

These two statements contradict.

If there's a "right path" and the system rewards you for finding it, in effect the system is indirectly telling you what to do.

Boring. I dont want aimless weekly dungeon crawls that never lead to anything larger than a kid who fell down a well type game. If you like that playloop and you can repeat it over and over more power to you.

I actually have come to prefer specific campaign paths, I want to see being X evolve into all its stages and grow to a setting wide proportion. I don't want conveniently wrapped up weekly dungeon crawls.

There's a very big gap between these two things; I fall in said gap.

I want to discover grand conspiracies, ancient mysteries, leave a mark on the world. Even in a sandbox, I prefer a large campaign long goal placed before the PCs at the beginning. They have to work session after session towards it. This alleviates the "no way out feeling" even though I think more blame is to lay at the material and GM feet if players want to bail. YMMV.

I agree about the big long-term goals, BUT I want three other things:

1) lots of shorter-term goals that may or may not be related to anything;
2) a sense that once the big goal has been achieved another can arise (or will have already arisen) to take its place and keep the game/campaign going;
3) the ability and freedom as players to have our characters do what they want in the setting even if that means abandoning the initial goals/quests and-or throwing curveballs at the DM.

No, its not supposed to be a job, its supposed to be fun. Admittedly, BA allows for mixed parties better than several of the latest iterations of the game, but I don't see the appeal. While I agree with the sentiment of your ideas about individual XP getting all players involved in the game, I think making folks compete individually in a group based game is a bad way to go about it.

Why? It's a team-based game, sure, but what's wrong with wanting to be best on the team?

 

[M_Natas]

To me, Milestone Leveling feels too much like DM fiat. The DM decides on a whim, when the Players Level up, and it usually feels arbitrary, even when I as the DM do it. Also, Milestone-Leveling takes away one way for the players to track their progress. XP is one of the two main mechanics in DND 5e to show progress (the other one being the Character Levels themselves).
And the feeling of progress is an important part of D&D and most games. If you don't have a feel of progress, if you feel stuck, if everything feels the same old, be it a game or real life, it sucks.

Like for example, in my game I DM with milestones (that started 4,5 Years ago), my players were not pursuing the main-goals of the story arc but some side quests. By my design, they didn't reach the milestones for a level-up for a long time and the players didn't like it, because they were stuck at that level. I could have changed the milestones, of course, but then I would have to change my whole milestone leveling system ...

When you take out XP you will have to replace it with another way to track the progress to the next level, or it will feel arbitrary, and the players could feel dissatisfied and "betrayed" by the DM, when they think, they are stuck at a level.

XP is like a progress bar that the players can see. Watching a progress bar fill is a satisfying thing for most players, that's why a lot of games use those (and even Books and Movies - come on, everybody loved it, when Neville Longbottom got 10 Points for Gryffindor to beat Slytherin in the house cup in the First Harry Potter Book!). It is an easy way to bind the players closer to the game.
If you remove it, the only thing that is left in D&D in a mechanical way to track progress are the levels themselves (there is also Wealth-progress and gear-progress in D&D 5e, but that is not very robust)
All other progress would be Ingame/"Story"-progress (we have to fulfill this quest, go in this dungeon ... ).

And also, yes, you can incentivize player behavior by choosing what you give XP for. That's a big bonus, too.
For example, if your players tend to do the 1-Encounter-Day (doing one combat, then taking a long rest) when the dungeon delve, you can disincentivize that, by repopulating the Dungeon and only giving 1/10 of the XP for the Monsters that came back, because the players waiting a day to get their long rest (giving 1/10 XP feels worse than giving no XP). You can decide to not give XP for Murderhoboing innocent people and fighting the city guard after they want to arrest you for murderhoboing. XP is a great tool for DMs and Game Designers.

Will the game work without XP? Of course. Like I said, I DM without XP for the last 4 1/2 years, and it is mostly fine. But in my next campaign, when this is over, I'm bringing XP back, because it helps with the feel of progress in the game, it feels fairer for the players, and it gives me as the DM a tool to incentivize good player behavior.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Do you think the game loses something in some ways? Like, you’re headed toward a big conflict and the GM decides you guys better level up before hand.

As you gather at the gate, preparing to mount your steeds, the High Priestess appears, bearing a gift, the very Sword of Kinnis, the hero who's shield you bear! "Go forth and destroy the enemies of our kingdom, as those who came before you have done!" Well, in Heroes of Myth and Legend, that LITERALLY IS gaining a level. Obviously you want there to be some substance to that, you didn't just wake up one morning and get handed an artifact grade object for kicks. Mechanical and Narrative, wedded as one.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Also, Milestone-Leveling takes away one way for the players to track their progress. XP is one of the two main mechanics in DND 5e to show progress (the other one being the Character Levels themselves).

Haha, character level giving a feeling of progress in 5e...

 

[niklinna]

To me, Milestone Leveling feels too much like DM fiat. The DM decides on a whim, when the Players Level up, and it usually feels arbitrary, even when I as the DM do it. Also, Milestone-Leveling takes away one way for the players to track their progress. XP is one of the two main mechanics in DND 5e to show progress (the other one being the Character Levels themselves).

XP is usually as much DM fiat as milestone level; after all, who decides when the PCs get XP, and what for?

And the feeling of progress is an important part of D&D and most games. If you don't have a feel of progress, if you feel stuck, if everything feels the same old, be it a game or real life, it sucks.

Like for example, in my game I DM with milestones (that started 4,5 Years ago), my players were not pursuing the main-goals of the story arc but some side quests. By my design, they didn't reach the milestones for a level-up for a long time and the players didn't like it, because they were stuck at that level. I could have changed the milestones, of course, but then I would have to change my whole milestone leveling system ...

Whatever happened to achieving personal goals? Way back there was this computer game called Myth: The Fallen Lords, and I decided I was going to finish the game with zero casualties. It was a personal goal, and I replayed every single level until I beat it without losing any soldiers. It was incredibly satisfying to figure that out for each level, but the game sure didn't reward me in any mechanical way for doing it.

Personal goals don't require a singular stat, be that XP or levels (which are just arbitrary XP thresholds that concrete advancements are hung on; that is, the two are actually the same scale). Clearing a dungeon is a thing you can track as progress. Rooting out a cult or secret cabal, member by member, is a thing you can track as progress. Collecting the parts of the tropey broken artifact is a thing you can track as progress. Keep a list of these, if the players need a number they can see growing.

Why couldn't you listen for, or ask, what your players' personal goals are? Then, when they achieve those goals, you give them XP, or a level-up. Yes, you would have to change (or ditch) your whole milestone-leveling system, but since that feels too much like DM fiat to you anyhow, maybe everybody wins.

Why couldn't you listen for signs of players being bored with the level they're at, and use that as an opportunity to give them a "milestone" level-up? If your players (or you!) are not having fun, something needs to change. It might not be power level—but it might. Or, you could just make it clear that they players can explicitly state when they are ready for, or want, a level-up. This could be as a group, or individually (although it's likely that as soon as one person opts to level up, the others will follow in short order). Don't button down the details of your encounters too far in advance if you take these approaches, of course.

When you take out XP you will have to replace it with another way to track the progress to the next level, or it will feel arbitrary, and the players could feel dissatisfied and "betrayed" by the DM, when they think, they are stuck at a level.

XP is like a progress bar that the players can see. Watching a progress bar fill is a satisfying thing for most players, that's why a lot of games use those (and even Books and Movies - come on, everybody loved it, when Neville Longbottom got 10 Points for Gryffindor to beat Slytherin in the house cup in the First Harry Potter Book!). It is an easy way to bind the players closer to the game.

Again, XP is just one progress bar. And points for Gryffindor is a lot like faction status; most games that do that have many factions, even if a player is focusing on one at a given time. In my current Blades in the Dark campaign, we have lots of factions, and if our status with one goes up, our status with others is likely to change, too (in either direction). Some factions are allied; some are rivals. World of Warcraft, back when I played it, had similiar friendly and rival factions. That makes progress much more interesting and dynamic than a single bar that fills up. How might you fit something else like that into a game, where progress on one axis affects progress on another axis?

Again, there are plenty of ways to track progress, and again, it doesn't have to be to a next level (of power, or complexity).

If you remove it, the only thing that is left in D&D in a mechanical way to track progress are the levels themselves (there is also Wealth-progress and gear-progress in D&D 5e, but that is not very robust)
All other progress would be Ingame/"Story"-progress (we have to fulfill this quest, go in this dungeon ... ).

The game element of D&D—and any roleplaying game—is important, as is the "story" bit. But they can be important in relation to one another, and not just for their own sakes (not that there's anything wrong with that!).

(Statement above revised based on private feedback.)

And also, yes, you can incentivize player behavior by choosing what you give XP for. That's a big bonus, too.

Again, that sounds like the DM fiat/whim you expressed a problem with at the beginning of your post.

For example, if your players tend to do the 1-Encounter-Day (doing one combat, then taking a long rest) when the dungeon delve, you can disincentivize that, by repopulating the Dungeon and only giving 1/10 of the XP for the Monsters that came back, because the players waiting a day to get their long rest (giving 1/10 XP feels worse than giving no XP). You can decide to not give XP for Murderhoboing innocent people and fighting the city guard after they want to arrest you for murderhoboing. XP is a great tool for DMs and Game Designers.

If your players enjoy 1-Encounter-Days, and don't enjoy being punished for it, well, why are you making what should be an enjoyable pastime not enjoyable? Maybe find ways to incentivize rather than dis-incentivize. Maybe talk to your players and find out what playstyle they enjoy most, both before beginning and as you play (since they may not know when you begin, or their preferences may change through play), adjusting whatever measures the group uses to track the various kinds of progress. Maybe observe the incentives and disincentives baked into the system and talk about those, and tune them to fit the whole group.

Will the game work without XP? Of course. Like I said, I DM without XP for the last 4 1/2 years, and it is mostly fine. But in my next campaign, when this is over, I'm bringing XP back, because it helps with the feel of progress in the game, it feels fairer for the players, and it gives me as the DM a tool to incentivize good player behavior.

XP may feel fairer, but it's every bit as arbitrary as DM-fiat milestones. (But I do see you've mentioned incentivizing after all!)

 

[niklinna]

One side bit I figured I'd mention. I recently started playing in the 13th Age playtest for their second edition. There is a milestone-driven mechanic in that game where the players get to pick one advancement from their next level early, before actually taking the full level-up. This makes advancement more incremental and organic (hoo boy that word, but that's how it feels to me).

This wouldn't be too hard to drop into a D&D game (13th Age is just another spin on D&D, after all).

 

[pemerton]

Whatever happened to achieving personal goals?

<snip>

Why couldn't you listen for, or ask, what your players' personal goals are? Then, when they achieve those goals, you give them XP, or a level-up.

To me, this seems to tie directly to @kenada's post upthread.

5e's milestone XP system rewards the players for sticking to the GM's intended story - when they drift away from it (eg to pursue their PCs' personal goals) they cease being rewarded with XP. (To really work, this requires the GM to signal in some fashion what the milestones are. Otherwise it becomes a case of "hunt for the plot".)

Of the RPGs that I'm familiar with, the ones that most closely centre the pursuit of personal goals are Burning Wheel and its offshoots like Torchbearer. And these demand a different range of GMing approaches from those that I (at least, but I think also @kenada) associated with milestone levelling.

 

[Lanefan]

XP is usually as much DM fiat as milestone level; after all, who decides when the PCs get XP, and what for?

Fair point, though if the DM is operating in good faith and sticks to the rules the game system itself determines a lot of that. In 1e, each monster has an xp value; each gold piece carries an xp, and so on; in more recent editions, each encounter carries an xp value with it; and if the DM sticks to those xp values there's little if any fiat involved.

Where fiat comes in when using such systems is with extras like "mission bonus" xp and xp for things that don't necessarily count as an "encounter" but are worthy of reward anyway. Here the trick is just to be as fair as you can with it.

The other trick is to view xp solely as a reward for what the character does, not the player. IME that really helps take bias out of it.

Whatever happened to achieving personal goals? Way back there was this computer game called Myth: The Fallen Lords, and I decided I was going to finish the game with zero casualties. It was a personal goal, and I replayed every single level until I beat it without losing any soldiers. It was incredibly satisfying to figure that out for each level, but the game sure didn't reward me in any mechanical way for doing it.

Personal goals don't require a singular stat, be that XP or levels (which are just arbitrary XP thresholds that concrete advancements are hung on; that is, the two are actually the same scale). Clearing a dungeon is a thing you can track as progress. Rooting out a cult or secret cabal, member by member, is a thing you can track as progress. Collecting the parts of the tropey broken artifact is a thing you can track as progress. Keep a list of these, if the players need a number they can see growing.

Cool if you're the only player or character in the game (as per your Myth example; but potentially messy when there's multiple players/characters each with their own personal goals that may or may not agree with each other or those of the overall party.

Why couldn't you listen for, or ask, what your players' personal goals are? Then, when they achieve those goals, you give them XP, or a level-up. Yes, you would have to change (or ditch) your whole milestone-leveling system, but since that feels too much like DM fiat to you anyhow, maybe everybody wins.

Still doesn't help.

If I tweak your Myth example and make my character's personal goal "Get through this adventure without taking any damage", the game is now rewarding me for hanging back and letting others take the hits.

And if this brings about a situation where the DM has to (or probably should) reject certain personal goals then all this does is breed arguments.

Why couldn't you listen for signs of players being bored with the level they're at, and use that as an opportunity to give them a "milestone" level-up? If your players (or you!) are not having fun, something needs to change.

Ideally, if one or both of the overarching story or the day-to-day ongoing in-play events are engaging enough in and of themselves then the players won't be bored, regardless of level.

Also, it would be very easy to misinterpret player frustration with not feeling quite powerful enough (which is a good thing) as boredom with a level.

If your players enjoy 1-Encounter-Days, and don't enjoy being punished for it, well, why are you making what should be an enjoyable pastime not enjoyable? Maybe find ways to incentivize rather than dis-incentivize. Maybe talk to your players and find out what playstyle they enjoy most, both before beginning and as you play (since they may not know when you begin, or their preferences may change through play), adjusting whatever measures the group uses to track the various kinds of progress. Maybe observe the incentives and disincentives baked into the system and talk about those, and tune them to fit the whole group.

XP may feel fairer, but it's every bit as arbitrary as DM-fiat milestones. (But I do see you've mentioned incentivizing after all!)

The main thing I want to incentivize with xp is getting on with it and taking some risks. Doesn't always work perfectly, but it's better than nothing, and helps discourage passenger characters.

 

[pointofyou]

To me, this seems to tie directly to @kenada's post upthread.

5e's milestone XP system rewards the players for sticking to the GM's intended story - when they drift away from it (eg to pursue their PCs' personal goals) they cease being rewarded with XP. (To really work, this requires the GM to signal in some fashion what the milestones are. Otherwise it becomes a case of "hunt for the plot".)

Of the RPGs that I'm familiar with, the ones that most closely centre the pursuit of personal goals are Burning Wheel and its offshoots like Torchbearer. And these demand a different range of GMing approaches from those that I (at least, but I think also @kenada) associated with milestone levelling.

What @niklinna is describing is pretty much exactly how my friend runs his D&D games. The PCs decide on their goals and as they work toward those goals they level up.