Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GMMichael" data-source="post: 7358036" data-attributes="member: 6685730">Or just have a check-sheet that you tick off after each encounter. Let me worry about the framework <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Depends on the encounter. This can put GM planning into play, tailoring encounters for a certain expected response, but it could fall flat if the game is structured so that one PC can always trump the others. So it seems there's a GM incentive in this XP plan as well - design games so that each player has a chance to shine. I suppose the sandboxers won't like this plan too much.Not just get to the end of the act, but to do so with some measure of favorable outcome. If the end of the act is, "PCs all landed in the dungeon, locked up and listening to the prince's coronation from beneath ground level," that's not really level-worthy.I've had pretty good success with offering in-game rewards as carrots. Levels just sort of sweeten the deal.That's probably the best way to go. Although "training time" could be used for the newer class features. Indeed, back in a D&D3 campaign, I would award the more subtle features of a level-up right away, and require either some down time or a story-based reason for gaining the more elaborate class feautres.Why wouldn't classes define goals? Does the fighter not fight? The thief not thieve? The wizard not...</blockquote>

Verification