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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="lin_fusan" data-source="post: 3797852" data-attributes="member: 37085">Story timeI have a personal story that illustrates the strength/weaknesses of the DM power equation between 2e and 3e.2e: There was an optional rule for determining individual XP. Even though it was an optional rule, I think it illustrates the methods/rulings 2e (and to some extent 1e) used. Each class had a list of XP gained doing certain things. For example, magic-users (wizards) gained something like 100*spell level XP each time he cast a spell. But was that for every spell? For only a useful spell? What determines a useful spell?Once, I argued as a DM that casting Rope Trick in the middle of a safe, quiet village did not garner XP. The player said that it should, 'cause there might have been an assassin. Argue, argue, argue. On top of that, the XP gain was so variable, than one character kept getting nothing, only because he was playing a vital, but supportive role, rather than an XP-gaining role.This optional rule was a headache, because it was so subjective on my part that there really wasn't any method of "fair" possible. Someone would feel robbed of their "rightful" XP regardless of what I choose.3e: After a particularly grueling fight with a level 2 or 3 party, I award XP based on the CR of the opponents (thieves in a thieves lair). The players were complaining that it was too low. They pulled out the DMG and pointed out the chart that stated they should gain a bonus percentage of XP for a difficult fight. However, I felt that they played practically crappy. The ranger was rushing from room to room, leaving behind the other characters. No one was covering the spellcasters from sneak attacks from behind. The druid player wasn't summoning monsters at the time (for some reason), and it was a mess. They survived by pure dumb luck on their part and poor rolls on mine. There was a supposedly "objective" system in 3e so that I could be fair, but yet there were still complaints about my rulings. (On the flip side, no one argued for less XP for defeating a boss monster really quickly and taking no hits.)Anyway, my personal experience stories are my way of explaining that the idea of taking power away from the DM, for me, means having an objective, standardized ruleset that you can depend on, which never remains perfectly objective and standard because you are dealing with people. It's a baseline to work with, and nothing more.What some DMs do in 3e, I feel, is believe that the rules are law, and that they don't need to depend on anything else. They might not realize that the rules are kind of an equation, so if they reduce the amount of treasure per encounter for their campaign, they better remember that the game assumes a certain amount of money for the character, such that a certain CR at a certain point might not be an equivalent challenge anymore, for example.</blockquote>

Verification