Design & Development: Quests

[Reynard]

How important is this? In 3rd edition, I think it would be pretty important. If you hand out extra GP for completing a task, this might give the characters more equipment than they should have by their level. If you hand out XP, they might have too little. If you assign a CR to a story award, you can determine appropriate treasuer and XP fitting the system. Still doesn't give you a guideline how much something is worth, and how you should handle such rewards if they only apply to specific characters.

That's a good point: one of 3E's problems that it is too easily upset by an overage in XP or gold than previous editions. In 1E or 2E an accidental "Monty" haul was more easily resolved because, generally speaking, what the PCs bought with that exra 50K gp didn't have that big of an impact on play. In 3E, not so much. And a lot more XP was required to level, so a too-big XP reward wouldn't have a great impact over the length of a few sessions.

However, one benefit of not having a structured system for doling out "non combat" XP is that the DM can determine the relative value of the non-combat stuff to the players, and thereby define its relative importance in the campaign. If the non-combat stuff nets you twice the XP, for example, it indicates that the DM thinks it is twice as important (without being forced to put twice as many encounters of this type in the adventure).

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

That's a good point: one of 3E's problems that it is too easily upset by an overage in XP or gold than previous editions. In 1E or 2E an accidental "Monty" haul was more easily resolved because, generally speaking, what the PCs bought with that exra 50K gp didn't have that big of an impact on play. In 3E, not so much. And a lot more XP was required to level, so a too-big XP reward wouldn't have a great impact over the length of a few sessions.

However, one benefit of not having a structured system for doling out "non combat" XP is that the DM can determine the relative value of the non-combat stuff to the players, and thereby define its relative importance in the campaign. If the non-combat stuff nets you twice the XP, for example, it indicates that the DM thinks it is twice as important (without being forced to put twice as many encounters of this type in the adventure).

Well, at this point, we might enter house-rule territory, but a DM could certainly use the structured story awards and just double the values, while halving the XP values for monsters.

The question might be how useful the quest/story award mechanics turn out to be. If the guidelines on how to judge story award XP/Treasure are good, they will be a boon. I tend to assume that an experienced DM will not really require them. An experienced DM might have come up with the "Story Goal => CR for XP and treasure), but a new-comer might be glad if the method is mentioned in the DMG.

I think many of the new rules in the DMG are there to give the inexperienced DM the tools that an experienced DM has come up on his own, and show them possiblities they otherwise would have gathered later (or never!). I think that as a boon for the game and its players as a whole.

 

[Rechan]

It shocks me this is still being argued.

 

[Wormwood]

It shocks me this is still being argued.

Really? Really?

 

[Rechan]

Really? Really?

Yeah. 13 pages of "It's good to give Xp for completing tasks." "NO, that's railroading."

It's only two people carrying the torch for one side.

But I guess, you know, "Internet message board". Guess I'm just naive.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Yeah. 13 pages of "It's good to give Xp for completing tasks." "NO, that's railroading."

It's only two people carrying the torch for one side.

But I guess, you know, "Internet message board". Guess I'm just naive.

It's a normal phenomena and I have watched it countless of times. And I also participated in it. I guess it's some kind of masochism that makes us do this.

Though I think the past 10 posts might have contained something new, or at leas a slight change in the "back and forth". Maybe that's why we do it?

 

[Imaro]

I just want to be able to say I got the last post...so...uhm...there.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

I just want to be able to say I got the last post...so...uhm...there.

I'd rather hand that privilege to Mike Mearls, from the WotC boards, whose words you have been hanging on throughout this thread:

Second, what's to stop the DM from asking the players to create quests?