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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="steeldragons" data-source="post: 6254553" data-attributes="member: 92511">As do I.Because, in the game we call D&D, XP is what/how you measure advancement. It's the framework on which the game is built. Now, is it possible to throw it out and just level when "makes sense"? Sure it is. And as has been stated over and over, many people choose to do so. That's all well and good as that's the joy of table-to-table preference. It's also possible to level up "whenever the DM says so" or [completely foreign to my sensibilities] "when the players say so/want to." That's what folks want to do in their games, that's their [completely valid] choice. That does not translate to "it's what the game should default to do." They do indeed. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Though I do try to keep things in the D&D perspective, as what D&D does/is going to do is the topic of this forum, thread and discussion. What other RPGs do, how other RPGs work, what other RPGs people prefer is all well and good...but, again, that is not some kind of translation to "ergo D&D should be doing X this way." These are two different things. I have no questions or qualms with players expecting their characters to advance. That is, after all the whole POINT of the game. D&D has never been designed to play level 1 or level 7 or level 15 PCs through an entire campaign.I also have no questions or qualms about the players wanting/feeling/expecting that their PCs will be the driving force of the story. That through their choices and actions, the game-story progresses. This, again, in every incarnation fo the game I am familiar with, is the point of the game...other than those consciously choosing to undergo a direct railroad, obviously, [original Dragonlance mod's, I'm lookin' at you]. Which certainly can be fun, but is definitely not how the game is default-structured to use.  My issue is the idea that players want/feel/expect to be entitled to dictate WHEN their PCs should get more cookies and medals. Player expectation and player entitlement are not the same thing.  I completely want the players to have the former. Working toward a goal(s), whether a personal character goal or achieving various plot.story arcs and objectives, moving the game-story and, hopefully, having fun all along the way. I very much want the latter to be removed from the game....and just to add, I firmly believe this [entitlement] is a cultural computer-age (which yes, includes video games/MMOs) attitude that has arisen to the status of "cultural norm" in the past couple of decades. In that view, it is not a D&D or RPG thing, but runs far deeper and simply exhibits itself in RPGs as a result.  Thankfully, this is moot, as 5e is not (by definition) going to be 4e. But I fail to see/understand how this is so much more desirable or "user-friendly" than an XP chart to look at and say "Do you have Y many XP yet? No? Guess you need to adventure some more."Something else that I do not see/understand...why the game should be dictating this kind of thing. If the game is constructed that it takes that long...then that's how long it takes. But maybe another group can settle the encounter in half the time...or needs twice the time! Maybe a different edition doesn't need that long using every RAW and added optional system. One preference, and that's all it is, is not "right" or "better" than the other mode of play and the new game, 5e, should certainly not be telling us, in the books, you need X time to settle an encounter...and Y time means you level the PCs up. The implication being, if you don't take that much time, you are somehow doing something "wrong."   I'm not entirely sure how to parse this...what does it mean? How is "helpful description of the assumptions...help[ing you] anticipate the rough shape [you] can expect..." not a "guideline for advancement"?Again, how is "Approximate information [that] is still helpful for planning" not, similarly, a "guideline"?  This all sounds like the typical edition-transition never-ending circular arguments. People that don't want hard and fast XP charts say "the game shouldn't have XP charts or tell me to use XP this way" whereas the people who do use and want XP charts say they need them. The former will insist "it's easier to add than subtract" which, whether or not a relevant argument for mathematics, is not the same thing when talking about game elements. People that want to use XP however they want will/can do so, regardless of what the game suggests or offers as options and guidelines. People that want to use XP as a tracking/leveling mechanism can not do the same without making up the levels/assumptions themselves...which can then lead to huge divergences in balance and become problematic in regards to campaign time, game pacing and, ultimately, all of which effects player satisfaction and expectations. I'm not sure if all of that makes sense...it does, and flows together quite naturally, in my head...But not sure if I'm being clear for you all. Hope so. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Happy Friday all.--SD</blockquote>

Verification