Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kenada" data-source="post: 8649292" data-attributes="member: 70468">I made a follow up post on page one (page <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/the-many-types-of-sandboxes-and-open-world-campaigns.688826/post-8646397" target="_blank">#18</a>) where I outlined my XP rewards. They’re not discretionary. They’re prescribed. If you complete one or both goals, you get 3 XP. That’s it. The only thing the player gets to decide is whether they completed a goal. There is also a mechanism mentioned in post <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/the-many-types-of-sandboxes-and-open-world-campaigns.688826/post-8646355" target="_blank">#16</a> for identifying inappropriate goals.I admit I could have been slightly more specific about what constitutes a good goal. I took the opportunity to simplify/rewrite for that post and may have gone too far. For example, this is closer to what I had been using:Individual Goals: What you want to accomplish in the session. A good goal should be something concrete and attainable that <s>supports the group’s mission and</s> isn’t trivial. If the group thinks a goal is inappropriate, you should replace it with a new one.Edit: Reflecting on it some, it wasn’t quite that strict. Requiring support for the group’s mission feels like it might risk deprotagonizing the PCs. I apologize if this might change the context a little bit, but I felt it was important to correct.RPGs are games. I expect players to want to engage them as games. I also expect players to engage in good faith, and I think most of them will do so. Yes, some won’t. I have a friend who is not welcome at my table because he’s a toxic player. That’s a social problem. No amount of rules will change that or make it worth having him back at my table.</blockquote>

Verification