Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Starfox" data-source="post: 6291405" data-attributes="member: 2303">Something similar to what [MENTION=27160]Balesir[/MENTION] mentioned happens at the end of every long campaign I run. Some players want in-game rewards like power and magic items, others are primarily interested in continuing the story of their fictional alter-ego. The second kind of player wants to limit rewards like xp and magic items, because those rewards act like a doomsday clock - once the PCs have garnered enough rewards to be able to confront the end of their story, that is the end of the campaign. Sure, we will then begin a new campaign, but it always takes time and energy to form an attachment to the new character.This is in the adventure path kind of campaigns, where there is a concrete story the GM and players have agreed to tell together, a story with a beginning, middle, and end. Such a story can take a lot of &quot;filler&quot; that extends the life of the campaign, but once the endgame comes around, it is all done with. Even if we wanted to continue the character's story beyond the scope of the adventure path, it is generally hard to make up stories suitable for such high-powered characters without going to what we consider absurd lengths. Seen in this way, xp and other power-up rewards are actually demerits, since they bring the end of the story closer and closer.Another angle on the whole reward thing is that I've stopped giving any kind of individual awards. All characters in my games have the same level/xp and very similar &quot;budget&quot; for magic items and other leverage features. The concrete inspiration from this comes from the Amber role-playing game, where the author notes that there is no need to give greater rewards to better/more active players - those players already dominate the game table, there is no need to give them leverage to dominate even more than they already do.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Starfox, post: 6291405, member: 2303"] Something similar to what [MENTION=27160]Balesir[/MENTION] mentioned happens at the end of every long campaign I run. Some players want in-game rewards like power and magic items, others are primarily interested in continuing the story of their fictional alter-ego. The second kind of player wants to limit rewards like xp and magic items, because those rewards act like a doomsday clock - once the PCs have garnered enough rewards to be able to confront the end of their story, that is the end of the campaign. Sure, we will then begin a new campaign, but it always takes time and energy to form an attachment to the new character. This is in the adventure path kind of campaigns, where there is a concrete story the GM and players have agreed to tell together, a story with a beginning, middle, and end. Such a story can take a lot of "filler" that extends the life of the campaign, but once the endgame comes around, it is all done with. Even if we wanted to continue the character's story beyond the scope of the adventure path, it is generally hard to make up stories suitable for such high-powered characters without going to what we consider absurd lengths. Seen in this way, xp and other power-up rewards are actually demerits, since they bring the end of the story closer and closer. Another angle on the whole reward thing is that I've stopped giving any kind of individual awards. All characters in my games have the same level/xp and very similar "budget" for magic items and other leverage features. The concrete inspiration from this comes from the Amber role-playing game, where the author notes that there is no need to give greater rewards to better/more active players - those players already dominate the game table, there is no need to give them leverage to dominate even more than they already do. [/QUOTE]

Verification