What! Limper has a gripe?

[barsoomcore]

Crafting a great character is a LOT of work, it's a benefit to the game.... do you think just having your job is it's own reward? Do you not want a bonus for being the best?

My campaign's not a job. It's a game. And it is entirely its own reward. If XP make your players happy and feel good about the hard work they do, then that's great. It's not the way I do things.

If a person excels they should be rewarded. It's not fair nor balanced for the weak links to be carried by their betters.

Who exactly is being carried and where are they getting carried to? I don't care if a player wants to play a quiet character, a min-max character or a deep and carefully thought-out character -- EXCEPT insofar as it interferes with the enjoyment of everyone else. Beyond a certain point, min-maxing makes everyone else's suspension of disbelief more difficult, so I disapprove of too much. I don't express my disapproval by witholding XP (which is another way of looking at any sort of bonus -- you're witholding those XP from the players who didn't get the bonus), though. I express it by saying, "Hey! I disapprove of too much min-maxing!"

Boo Hoo! Piffle on the feelings of the unmotivated or shy! This silliness of thought is why communism isn't a viable system.

Interesting mental leap. Piffle on the feelings of the shy, huh? I guess you decide what sort of behaviour is appropriate for your game and reward people for doing what you think is best. That's cool. I don't want to do it.

The feelings of the shy matter just as much to me as the feelings of the outgoing.

From each according to ability to each according to need is a real burden on the competent.

Um, who is burdened when everyone gets equal XP? Is it that a great player won't get as many bonuses and thus those little numbers on their character sheet won't increase as fast as they might if the DM were more generous? Is my motivated player going to cry because they're the same level as the shy girl who doesn't yell to make sure her ideas are heard at the expense of everyone else's?

Well Boo Hoo! Piffle on the feelings of the anal-retentive and insensitive!

XP is a game mechanic so that problem-solving doesn't become boring too swiftly -- providing players with new options at regular intervals, giving them a feeling of increased influence and control. They're not some emotional stick and carrot I use to direct playing styles. If somebody's playing style is not appropriate to my group, I don't withold XP -- I TELL them they need to change. If a player is getting involved and thinking deeply about the game then their reward is in seeing their hard work pay off -- seeing their research yield results, their plan come to fruition, and so on. They solve the mystery or save the village and THAT's their reward. If they spend time helping the other players have more fun, encouraging suspension of disbelief and interacting with characters rather than players, then their reward is more fun. The game becomes more fun for everyone when we all do that.

Making up bonuses is too much work. Everyone gets the same. None of my players complain. Of course, if they did I'd dock them a thousand XP.

 

[Destil]

Uhm... I don't know where you're coming from with this. Check out DMG 168-169, Roleplaying Rewards. There are some nice guidelines for Role Playing rewards.

And, all in all, the XP system presented in the DMG is beautiful because it's largely just that: a guideline. There's a sidebar telling you the whys, a nice sized section telling you the hows, and basically says "Do whatever you damn well please. Here's how the math works out, change it as you wish." It's completely open for free-form adaptation and purely ad hoc rewards, or careful, exact, mathematical rewards according to charts and values. There's room for everybody, from the anal CR obsessed XP nazi who tracks players XP to within 4 decimal places (of course he tracks your XP, why wouldn't he? Think he wants the player to do it?) to the loving, nurturing hippie free-form type who tells you to take as much XP as you feel you deserve. If you don't like the way it works, change it in your game. If you're not the DM then it's more an issue of not liking an aspect of his or her style, rather than the rules.

 

[Aaron L]

Apparently he plays in a game where the players are at odds with, and competing with, each other. I can think of no other reason why he would label other players as "weak links" and demand more experience for his characters. Is this a troll? It's like how Knights of the Dinner Table characters would act.

 

[Destil]

Oh, and, IMHO:

You get role-playing rewards for roleplaying challanges. If your party interacts well with the world, the world on a whole notices, and you get better access to things like information, allies & alliences. If there's lots of witty banter or other good inter-party chatter then the rest of the world may note how well the party works togeather (or dosn't, if the're at each other's throats), and changes how it reacts to them, accordingly.

You get mechanichal rewards for overcoming mechinachal challenges, like combat.

For things that are neither here or there, i'd give a mix of the two. I'd give you perhaps 1/2 XP if you fail to overcome a challange you could have, but didn't because you didn't rely on meta-game information.

 

[Limper]

Apparently he plays in a game where the players are at odds with, and competing with, each other. I can think of no other reason why he would label other players as "weak links" and demand more experience for his characters. Is this a troll? It's like how Knights of the Dinner Table characters would act.

We're not at odds... there are 6 of us (currently) and one of them we've been carrying for a decade. I do find it offensive that the quite/shy useless bump at the end of the table who's been casting the SAME spell for 10 years to no effect, who has NOT ONCE solved anything is now the same level as the rest of us! They are wasting my experience, they are wasting the DMs time, they contribute nothing and 3e seems to think its OK that they get equal XPs.

If I go out of my way to facilitate YOUR story or you to facilitate mine (depends on whos running)...this facilitator is worth more than the wall flower... if there is reward for excellence then you'll see ALOT more excellence. In game perks are OK but I think a more quantifiable system to differentiate and denote contribution to the story is a must, and the bottom line of the game is XPs.

Destil: There are many DMs out there who view those guildlines as gospel... I don't.. I reward the players who make the story come alive... who make my DMing worth while... I reward them with XPs and in game perks. I find it hard to justify catering in any way to those who dont contribute to the game.

 

[Psion]

Uh, give bonuses then. I do.

Incidentally, not for roleplaying per se -- not all players are thespians. But rather, for contributions to the game or moving the story forward, be it by cleverness, self-sacrifice, or roleplaying.

 

[Duncan Haldane]

We're not at odds... there are 6 of us (currently) and one of them we've been carrying for a decade. I do find it offensive that the quite/shy useless bump at the end of the table who's been casting the SAME spell for 10 years to no effect, who has NOT ONCE solved anything is now the same level as the rest of us! They are wasting my experience, they are wasting the DMs time, they contribute nothing and 3e seems to think its OK that they get equal XPs

So would this player having less Xp make any difference? If he's not doing anything in game then hopefully he's not interfering either. Does it reduce your enjoyment because he's there?

I think this bothers you far more than it should. If he means nothing to the game, ignore him - pretend he's not there.

If he's having fun why should he change?

Duncan

 

[Psychotic Dreamer]

So because someone is not as comfterable with either Roleplaying or the System they should be punished. So you would be fine if the levels ended up being something like: Player A is level 3, Player B is level 5, Player C is level 8 and Player D is level 11?

Personally I do not think someone should be punished for being shy. I think the rest of the group should help this player by talking to them and assist them in becoming a better player. Rather than trying to make them suffer for whatever reason they are not doing as much as the rest of the group.

Those are my 2 cents.

 

[Limper]

Would the bump having a lower level at the end mean anything to me.... YES!

We used to try but after 7 years we gave up... except the DM who continues to write things for a player who doesn't help out... so no they are not out of the way, they cannot be forgotten, they are a burden and are wasting the rewards which should belong to the competent!

Psion: Thats what I do... woefully I'm playing currently and this issue is sticking in my craw!


If you are managing a business who gets the bigger raise? Who gets the bonus? The preformer... who doesn't the cube warmer.

 

[Psychotic Dreamer]

Playing a Roleplaying Game is not a business and if a DM ever runs a game I am in like a business... I do not want anything to do with it then. I hate the way business runs and would not want a game to run that way.

If you truely feel this fellow should be removed from the game then talk to the DM. If everyone else feels this way have the rest of the players get together with the DM and talk about it.

If I were running the game I would also continue to try and get the less than interested player into the game also.

I still stick with my opinion that a player should not be penalized for not being as good or comfertable roleplaying as the others. If someone is causing trouble for the group on purpose... that is another story.