Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7460078" data-attributes="member: 996">XP for gold was an option in 2e, as well, IIRC, but, yes, it was pretty standard before that.&nbsp; In 3e, ironnically, you don't get xp for gold, but you can burn xp, via item creation, to save gold, and there was expected wealth/level, so there was still a link between gold &amp; xp, just an indirect one...&nbsp;You can give xp for avoiding monsters, or even not give xp (or give less) for fighting them.&nbsp; It doesn't make tons of sense, but little about xp does.&nbsp;Yes.&nbsp; That's &quot;favoring cunning over brawn,&quot; right there.&nbsp;It's right if the system is about encouraging/rewarding acquiring treasure, not fighting.&nbsp; You would want to escape from the zombie siege and loot the ruins of the towns the zombies had alrady passed through, for instance, while the zombies go eat somebody else, you could then follow the zombies on their rampage, looting as they go.&nbsp; Heck, zombies are slow, you could precede them, sell fake 'protection from zombie' scrolls to the locals, and case any choice loot they may have left after buying them, to pick up after the zombies eat their brains.&nbsp;In the past, it was 'find &amp; retain for a time,' so you could have the huge sum blow right by them - stolen by other adventurers, required to raise half the party, or whaever other money pit occurs to you.&nbsp; Slower-acting or growing-equity money pits could keep the party poor while letting them level up.&nbsp;Old-school you got exp for combat as well as treasure, and it was not unusual to aware combat xp for avoiding a combat (back in the day, I did half exp for avoiding a fight, then if you avoided it again, 1/4, etc... with the balance if you ever finally ganked 'em).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7460078, member: 996"] XP for gold was an option in 2e, as well, IIRC, but, yes, it was pretty standard before that. In 3e, ironnically, you don't get xp for gold, but you can burn xp, via item creation, to save gold, and there was expected wealth/level, so there was still a link between gold & xp, just an indirect one... You can give xp for avoiding monsters, or even not give xp (or give less) for fighting them. It doesn't make tons of sense, but little about xp does. Yes. That's "favoring cunning over brawn," right there. It's right if the system is about encouraging/rewarding acquiring treasure, not fighting. You would want to escape from the zombie siege and loot the ruins of the towns the zombies had alrady passed through, for instance, while the zombies go eat somebody else, you could then follow the zombies on their rampage, looting as they go. Heck, zombies are slow, you could precede them, sell fake 'protection from zombie' scrolls to the locals, and case any choice loot they may have left after buying them, to pick up after the zombies eat their brains. In the past, it was 'find & retain for a time,' so you could have the huge sum blow right by them - stolen by other adventurers, required to raise half the party, or whaever other money pit occurs to you. Slower-acting or growing-equity money pits could keep the party poor while letting them level up. Old-school you got exp for combat as well as treasure, and it was not unusual to aware combat xp for avoiding a combat (back in the day, I did half exp for avoiding a fight, then if you avoided it again, 1/4, etc... with the balance if you ever finally ganked 'em). [/QUOTE]

Verification