D&D General An alternative to XP

[Oofta]

It was in response to you saying this:

Which was a response to this:

Which was a response to this:

Which was a response to this:


Do you now follow why I made that statement? I say it's weird to argue XP is gamey but levels aren't, and you appear to challenge me by saying people level up in real life. I note that this argument -- that if people level up through experience -- also supports XP just as well. You return with asking if people have XP stamped on their forehead (a rather bizarre introduction) and I say as much as they have their level stamped there. You respond by saying you do level up, but not in classes you don't have.

In all of this, I haven't introduced new and exciting things. You have (people level up in real life, XP stamped on foreheads, classes that you belong to). Trying to pin how weird this has gotten on me is itself fairly weird. Also it seems like an attempt to get me to believe in a chain of events that didn't actually happen that way.


Context matter, man. You can't claim your statements are entirely anodyne when they're entirely in the context of me pointing out that claiming XP is gamey while levels aren't. Unless you're not challenging that at all and this is a strange and colossal misunderstanding where you insist one something because you think I'm saying something in challenge to it?

I should know better than to bother trying to have a conversation with you, I'm done. I've made my opinions clear on the subject.

 

[Morrus]

Ovinomancer, Oofta, please both of you disengage. Put each other on ignore if you have to.

@Ovinomancer, you have a whole bunch of post reports about you, and not all from one person. I suggest you find a different thread to participate in.

 

[the Jester]

And 1 XP was awarded for keeping 1 GP worth of treasure found during the adventure. It's difficult to overstate just how important that is in driving play — with that rule in place, you quite literally never have to "dangle hooks" in front of the players. They'll seek out dungeons on their own, because they want treasure, because they want to level up.

A thing that is sometimes overlooked- and I didn't read the entire thread, so someone else may have already brought this up in more detail- is that if you use xp, you don't have to use it as written. Instead of just giving xp for defeating foes, you can give it for treasure. You can give it for roleplaying. You can give it for achieving goals, personal or party, or for whatever you want to motivate your party with. I love xp- I love the granularity of it and tracking it, and how it allows different characters to swap in and out of a group without artificially tying their advancement together, and I love how it enables mixed level play (by letting lower level characters catch up with their higher level pals).

I'm currently running a group using what I call the "ale and whores" xp system. Basically, the only way you get xp is by burning money on stuff nobody gets any real benefits from- thus the name. This pushes the characters toward a playstyle that reflects old Conan stories and the like- find adventure, get rich, party down with some Stygian lotus until you punch a horse in the face, get broke, find a new adventure. It also encourages things like hocking your armor for a few extra gp to drink away if you are just a bit short.

On the other hand, in the past, I used a system where you got half the normal xp for overcoming threats and then, at the end of each session, you could get xp for role-playing. For a while I had a "four categories" system- you could earn xp for role-playing your class, race, alignment, and personal traits. At a different point I had a system where everyone picked ten personality traits, with the option to add more as they leveled up, and at the end of the session they got xp for each trait they roleplayed (to a max of ten) during the session. These traits were completely player-defined. "I like dogs. I'm scared of spiders. I like the color blue. I prefer to be barefoot." Whatever.

Another thing I liked about this was being able to tailor my group's advancement rate. So for instance, I ran my "four categories" system in 3e, where you needed 1,000 xp to hit second level. I decided that if a group didn't do anything dangerous, but did do consistently good role-playing, I would like them to hit 2nd level in ten sessions- so rp xp should come out to a potential 100 per session, so 25 per category at first level. (And given the way the xp charts worked in 3e, it was easy to scale this up.) Under my ten traits system, each trait could earn you 10 xp per level per session and you would get the same (or a similar) advancement rate.

(This rather slow advancement rate also served to incentivize risky play for those quicker, easier combat xp. The combination of combat xp and rp xp tended to advance the group slightly slower than the standard just-challenge-xp system, but one could easily adjust to taste.)

Anyway, point is, xp can be versatile and serve a lot of different purposes. I think it's biggest advantage is decoupling the advancement of pcs from each other- which I know is a controversial stance these days.

 

[Jacob Lewis]

Just a suggestion, but if you haven't already you might want to post a few links to the studies that have proven this; else you're not likely to get anywhere in advancing your point.

Wait for it...

All one needs to do is step into a casino, and its stimuli tactics, to see that what @Charlaquin is saying sounds about right. Popular video games too.

Glad you brought this up.

So if we're gonna go full research on the subject, here's some links on related studies to consider:

Why are Some Games More Addictive than Others?
Links between video games and gambling
Cognitive behavioral therapy for problematic video game players
BEHAVIORAL ECONOMICS AND GAMBLING
Weapons of Mass Distraction: Random Rewards

Yeah, its effective alright. And no, I don't think it's an issue for most people playing D&D or anyone still using this traditional approach. BUT. It can, in fact, be useful to change player behaviors if employed with such intent. And it is not unheard of.

I don't think anyone has been arguing that the science is wrong. In fact, most of us, being intelligent and reasonable people, are already aware of what it is and how it is useful. But useful to what end? It is a technique for behavioral modification. Put the carrot on whatever stick you want your players to follow, and they will likely follow. That is, unless your players aren't motivated by XP. So if your players don't mind the subtle manipulation, go for it. A lot of us who have been playing the game since the early editions where this was the accepted norms. Times have changed since and we now see an evolution of less adversarial DMs and less manipulation in favor of player agency and choice.

So, if anyone is still determined to die on this hill, don't worry. I won't be claiming the XP.

 

[Li Shenron]

I am always a bit conflicted on this topic...

Many of my 5e games have been one-shots. In that case it doesn't even matter because I don't level up.

In longer games I want the players to get the feeling of progress, and I don't want fast levelling, so XP serve me the purpose of marking gradual progress even when there's many sessions between levels.

But at the same time I don't care about precise calculations. If I have time to spare I might grant XP by the rules, however this usually results in too fast levelling. In addition I definitely do not want XP to be earned only from combat encounters. So usually what I do instead is grant subjective XP based on what they did during the session, moderated by how soon I want next level up.

Practically this is a bit like milestone-based but still using XP.

In addition I stopped granting individual XP decades ago. Same XP to everyone who is present to the session, no XP to absent players.

 

[Charlaquin]

Winning the contest is an intrinsic reward, not an external reward. In many cases getting an external reward for something that you would have done for the intrinsic reward can be detrimental and lower your overall enjoyment.

Again, enjoyment is a much more complex feeling than what I’m talking about, which is pure, base dopamine release. Things that we call “intrinsically rewarding” generally feel that way because they trigger a dopamine release. Again, it’s the “I did a good job” chemical. When you get that sense of pride and accomplishment from a job well done? That’s dopamine. Mostly. The abstract thinking parts of our brains form opinions about what we feel and why, but fundamentally, it comes down to neurotransmitters.

Let's say I enjoy bicycling. I just do it because I enjoy the fresh air and getting to zone out for a bit.

Again, that’s dopamine.

Then I get an app on my phone and it tracks how far I bike and how many calories I use. If my motivation becomes do X miles or burn Y calories, the intrinsic value I had for biking can be lessened. Biking, which I used to enjoy just for biking becomes work, something I need to do for the number of calories burned external reward I get from my phone app.

But seeing progress being tracked on your phone app also triggers a dopamine release. This can be helpful for people who don’t find the “intrinsic reward” of exercise worth the tradeoff for the effort it requires. There are lots of reasons this may be the case. It isn’t for you, and that’s great, but that doesn’t change the fact that the activity, and the progress tracked on the phone app, both trip your brain’s reward system. Preferences, cost-benefit analysis, motivation, these are higher-order, more complex thinking than what I’m talking about.

I view D&D and XP the same way. I want the game play to be intrinsically rewarding, XP is externally rewarding. Instead of just having fun playing the game in the moment it can become grinding out XP which lowers the overall intrinsic reward. We still have levels but if people know they're going to level at the first opportunity after X hours of play like I do, they stop thinking about doing things in order to level.

Great. That’s a perfect valid reason to not want to use XP. Again, I am not saying, nor have I ever been saying, that this preference you have is wrong. I am just saying that human beings do in fact get a hit of the “I did a good job” brain chemical from gaining XP. Whether the overall effect that has on the game is desirable to you is an entirely different question I have zero interest in weighing in on. I do think it has a net positive effect on most campaigns, but I believe you when you say yours is not one of them.

 

[Oofta]

Again, enjoyment is a much more complex feeling than what I’m talking about, which is pure, base dopamine release. Things that we call “intrinsically rewarding” generally feel that way because they trigger a dopamine release. Again, it’s the “I did a good job” chemical. When you get that sense of pride and accomplishment from a job well done? That’s dopamine. Mostly. The abstract thinking parts of our brains form opinions about what we feel and why, but fundamentally, it comes down to neurotransmitters.

Again, that’s dopamine.

But seeing progress being tracked on your phone app also triggers a dopamine release. This can be helpful for people who don’t find the “intrinsic reward” of exercise worth the tradeoff for the effort it requires. There are lots of reasons this may be the case. It isn’t for you, and that’s great, but that doesn’t change the fact that the activity, and the progress tracked on the phone app, both trip your brain’s reward system. Preferences, cost-benefit analysis, motivation, these are higher-order, more complex thinking than what I’m talking about.

Great. That’s a perfect valid reason to not want to use XP. Again, I am not saying, nor have I ever been saying, that this preference you have is wrong. I am just saying that human beings do in fact get a hit of the “I did a good job” brain chemical from gaining XP. Whether the overall effect that has on the game is desirable to you is an entirely different question I have zero interest in weighing in on. I do think it has a net positive effect on most campaigns, but I believe you when you say yours is not one of them.

It goes back to getting a Hummel figurine. If I don't value overpriced porcelain, there will be no dopamine release.

But again... we're not going to agree. Have a good one.

EDIT: I'm sure a lot of people enjoy XP. I simply don't and don't remember ever seeing it as a reward.

 

[Charlaquin]

I agree and didn't mean to imply otherwise.. This all started with the statement that extrinsic rewards always work.

I never said that.

 

[Charlaquin]

Wait for it...

Glad you brought this up.

So if we're gonna go full research on the subject, here's some links on related studies to consider:

Why are Some Games More Addictive than Others?
Links between video games and gambling
Cognitive behavioral therapy for problematic video game players
BEHAVIORAL ECONOMICS AND GAMBLING
Weapons of Mass Distraction: Random Rewards

Yeah, its effective alright. And no, I don't think it's an issue for most people playing D&D or anyone still using this traditional approach. BUT. It can, in fact, be useful to change player behaviors if employed with such intent. And it is not unheard of.

I don't think anyone has been arguing that the science is wrong. In fact, most of us, being intelligent and reasonable people, are already aware of what it is and how it is useful. But useful to what end? It is a technique for behavioral modification. Put the carrot on whatever stick you want your players to follow, and they will likely follow. That is, unless your players aren't motivated by XP. So if your players don't mind the subtle manipulation, go for it. A lot of us who have been playing the game since the early editions where this was the accepted norms. Times have changed since and we now see an evolution of less adversarial DMs and less manipulation in favor of player agency and choice.

You imply here that using XP to encourage engaging with the game in certain ways is inherently adversarial, but I assure you this is not the case.

 

[Charlaquin]

I am always a bit conflicted on this topic...

Many of my 5e games have been one-shots. In that case it doesn't even matter because I don't level up.

In longer games I want the players to get the feeling of progress, and I don't want fast levelling, so XP serve me the purpose of marking gradual progress even when there's many sessions between levels.

But at the same time I don't care about precise calculations. If I have time to spare I might grant XP by the rules, however this usually results in too fast levelling. In addition I definitely do not want XP to be earned only from combat encounters. So usually what I do instead is grant subjective XP based on what they did during the session, moderated by how soon I want next level up.

Practically this is a bit like milestone-based but still using XP.

In addition I stopped granting individual XP decades ago. Same XP to everyone who is present to the session, no XP to absent players.

Milestones are, according to the DMG, a thing the DM can grant XP for. “Milestone- based but still using XP” is redundant, because milestones do use XP.

Other than that language nitpick, I agree with you on just about everything here. Some campaigns I will use individual XP, but not most.