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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercule" data-source="post: 6961080" data-attributes="member: 5100">Heh. I thought you were a grognard, too. You must have an "old soul" (grognard soul?).I'd say "bad idea". If the XP is still around combat, the PC focus will still be around combat. You might end up with different combats, though -- Rolemaster used to award monster XP to only the PC who got the killing blow and for being the first into a new area. I know of one group that had two types of characters: 1) front-line who sprinted through the dungeon, opening every door they could find and 2) clean-up crew who were constantly playing chicken waiting for the other PCs to weaken the hordes unleashed by type #1 to the point where they could get the last hit in. I guess there was the third type who neither sprinted nor lay in wait, but they didn't get as much XP, which thinned the herd a bit.While we're tossing around potentially bad ideas, how about this one: Award XP for all encounters equal to 5-10% of the value the PCs would receive for defeating the NPC(s) in combat (or some other number based on actual analysis of desired rate of advancement). This award is whether or not combat actually occurs. So, the players are incentivized to negotiate as much as to fight. It also means that playing out the haggling with the artificer to create that magic sword actually nets them some benefit. Ditto for shopkeepers, etc. (at least at low level, which still gives some grounding for later). Another consequence of this is that, because more important people (nobles, high priests, etc.) tend to be higher level, or at least have higher-level retainers, it benefits the players more to interact with higher status personages for reasons beyond the immediate "what's the quest reward".It would also be nice to find a way to appropriately award puzzle-solving. I don't know if an award per "real" use of a skill or tool would work, but it might be interesting.</blockquote>

Verification