• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Consequence and Reward in RPGs

I like to compare trends in the game industry as a whole with individual segments, such as RPGs. Often what’s happening “out there” will turn up in the individual segments, if it hasn’t already.


I like to compare trends in the game industry as a whole with individual segments, such as RPGs. Often what’s happening “out there” will turn up in the individual segments, if it hasn’t already.



The most striking trends in hobby games is the movement from games of consequence to games of reward. Players in hobby games in the past have been expected to earn what they received, but more and more in hobby games we’re seeing games that reward players for participation. This is a general trend in our society, where schoolkids expect rewards for participation rather than for achieving excellence, and in fact excellence is sometimes not allowed!

Reward-based games have always been with us via party games, and to a lesser extent family games. Virtually no one cares who wins a party game, and all of these games tend to be very simple and fully accessible to non-gamers. Mass-market games are much more reward-based then consequence-based. Hobby gamers might call them “not serious”.

A reward-based game is more like a playground than an organized competition, and the opposition in reward-based games tends to be weak/inconsequential/nonexistent.

Home video “save games” have always tended to make video games a “you can’t lose” proposition. We’re moving beyond that.

With free-to-play video games dominating the mobile market and a strong influence in other markets, designers reward players so that they’ll play the game long enough to decide to spend money in it. We see players who blame the game if they fail, who expect to be led around by the hand, even in games that people purchase.

Tabletop RPGs generally involve an unspoken pact between the players and the GM, so that the players can have fun and not have to worry too much about losing. But the game tends to be more enjoyable when there’s a possibility of failure - the triumphs are sweeter. The co-creator of D&D (Gary Gygax) put it this way in one of his last publications (Hall of Many Panes) "...a good campaign must have an element of danger and real risk or else it is meaningless - death walks at the shoulder of all adventurers, and that is the true appeal of the game."

Classic games involve conflict. Many so-called games nowadays do not involve conflict, and there are role-playing "games" that are storytelling exercises without much opposition.

Reflections of this trend in RPGs often involve abundant healing and ways to save characters from death, such as the ridiculous Revivify spell, usable by a mere fifth level cleric in D&D Fifth Edition, that brings back the dead on the field of battle.

35 years ago, a young player GMed his first game for our shared-characters campaign. He really wanted to ensure the players had a good time - so he gave out lots of magic items. We wanted players to earn what they received, so myself and the other lead GM waved our hands after the adventure and most of those items disappeared.

I’m a senior citizen, in my roots a wargamer, and I prefer games of consequence. But that's not where the world is headed.

contributed by Lewis Pulsipher
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
No XP for gold? You can play that way, I guess.
1e had xp for gp. 2e took it out. Many 1e groups took it out as well.

That said, it's possible you're both right when comparing 2e to 3e, as 2e evolved quite a bit during its run and by the end - with all the options and so forth - kinda wasn't as far from 3e as you might think.

Someone looking at a character sheet from 1991-era 2e would find it quite different than from 1998-era splat-soaked 2e; that same 1998-era sheet wouldn't be all that far adrift from a 2000-era 3e sheet as other than being different organized and named much of the same info would be there. Sort of.

Lanefan
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Hussar

Legend
Totally is possible to run AD&D btb.

Thank you for that. I needed the laugh. If that's your combat system in a flowchart (actually, EIGHT flowcharts) form I'm fairly confident in saying that the vast majority of people playing AD&D didn't follow the rules. :D But, I gotta admit, that's a pretty darn comprehensive set of charts there. I think the author might do Powerpoint slides for the Pentagon.
 

prosfilaes

Adventurer
I advocate a return to the classic style because I think most D&D groups are basically gamist and they would enjoy it more than the AP style (the other dominant style; Pemertonian scene-framing in my estimation is extremely niche). I think the bottleneck in uptake is not modern gamers' love of prepackaged story and dice-based exploration (I'm tending recently to think these are smokescreens by the relative minority of modern gamers who want the gamist experience but refuse to Step On Up to get it). It's just a lack of support from the game in terms of the tools and techniques needed to run it. Many modern DMs are not even aware of the concept of random encounters, much less why it's important for the DM to recuse themselves from the responsibility of putting encounters together on the fly.

"I think most D&D groups would enjoy playing the way I play more than the way the market has gone" is somehow not persuasive. In my experience, there are a lot of players who played 1E who now play Pathfinder; I know of one group that has existed for 25 years, with some members having started ten years before that, that plays Pathfinder. Also in my experience, the responses of players to character deaths has not encouraged me to run my game in a way that increases the number of PC fatalities.

Hard numbers, especially about what people "would enjoy playing" are going to be very hard to come up with. I'm satisfied that those that want Labyrinth Lords and OSRIC and friends can get them, and those of us who want Pathfinder or 5E can get them, with pemerton being the one stuck with the bag of an OOP game. (Sorry.) Perhaps some of us wouldn't be running or playing the games we are in an optimal world; there's a long list of games I'd rather be running than Pathfinder I'm running. But TORG or InSpectres or Farflung are less similar, not more similar to your playing style. If I really want to do a dungeon crawl, I've got Gloomhaven coming.

As for random encounters... I'l l let the Order of the Stick (Vaarsuvius) speak for me: "Each party has one (and only one) encounter because random encounters are tedious, and a waste of everyone's valuable time. So no matter how long the journey, you only have one random encounter before everyone gets bored and moves on to the main plot."
 


2e did not actually take it out but you guys had me wondering for a second there!
They made it optional, where I suppose it was probably assumed in earlier editions. They also had the individual class awards, where it xp-for-gp was on the Thief chart, and if you combined the two then Thieves earned 2xp per gp.
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
They made it optional, where I suppose it was probably assumed in earlier editions.
It was baked in to 1e, to the point where each magic item on the list had two values: a gp value and an xp value. That said, I've never yet encountered a group - even back in the day - that used xp for gp.

Not sure about 0e or B/X. I never realized xp for gp was even optional in 2e.

Lan-"if gp got me xp as well I'd be even greedier than I am now, if such a thing is possible"-efan
 

Jacob Marley

Adventurer
It was baked in to 1e, to the point where each magic item on the list had two values: a gp value and an xp value. That said, I've never yet encountered a group - even back in the day - that used xp for gp.

My group used XP for GP. Of course, we were also inspired to play D&D by stories of Robin Hood, The Three Musketeers, and buccaneers and buried gold (Thanks Lego Castle and Pirates sets!) more so than monster slaying. XP for GP felt natural to those types of stories.
 

Shasarak

Banned
Banned
It was baked in to 1e, to the point where each magic item on the list had two values: a gp value and an xp value. That said, I've never yet encountered a group - even back in the day - that used xp for gp.

It was not until 3e that I encountered a group who did not use xp for gp but that just meant that I got the xp for defeating them rather then for their stuff.
 

pemerton

Legend
I remember that thread.
Thanks for the links - I just re-read bits of it.

I advocate a return to the classic style because I think most D&D groups are basically gamist and they would enjoy it more than the AP style (the other dominant style; Pemertonian scene-framing in my estimation is extremely niche). I think the bottleneck in uptake is not modern gamers' love of prepackaged story and dice-based exploration (I'm tending recently to think these are smokescreens by the relative minority of modern gamers who want the gamist experience but refuse to Step On Up to get it). It's just a lack of support from the game in terms of the tools and techniques needed to run it.
Interesting conjecture, including the "smokescreen" part of it. I'm surprised you've only got one response!

I think you're right about interest in my preferred approach being modest, though I'm always a bit puzzled by that because a lot of RPGers claim to really be into "story", and I think it's the most reliable way of generating "story" without railroading.

pemerton being the one stuck with the bag of an OOP game. (Sorry.)
Don't worry about me - if I want to keep runing 4e, I've got plenty of material plus the ability to make more of my own if necessary!

In print/out-of-print is not a very signficant consideration in my RPGing.
 

Hussar

Legend
Heh, I'm in the same boat as [MENTION=89537]Jacob Marley[/MENTION] - we used xp for gold all the way through 1e, but, I never met a group that did so in 2e. The baseline rules were no xp for gold. To be honest, I didn't even realize it was an option in 2e. Buried somewhere in the DMG I assume?

I do remember classes had individual xp bonuses and that rogues who stole gold could earn xp that way, but, AFAIK, that was it.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top