D&D 5E What Single Thing Would You Eliminate

[Charlaquin]

Figuring out how much to award, for what, when, tracking those activities in-game, and then adding it all up.

If you're not thinking about how much to award, for what, and when, you're not rewarding anything. You're just picking a random number. I have an otherwise great dm who does this, and it's frankly worse than not giving xp because I get a weekly disappointment, because even the sense of reward I did get once is now soured, because that reward was removed.

Yeah, awarding random amounts of XP for random activities is obviously bad. Don’t do that.

I can tell you for certain that experience points do not always significantly improve fun. I've seen them ruin fun just as often, either by encouraging un-fun gameplay (just kill everything, only follow the plot, skip rp to go for more points, etc) or create tension and feelings of favoritism, or just be so arbitrary as to lose any sense of reward.

No, obviously if they’re used poorly they don’t make the game better. You can say that about literally any game system

The idea that any game would be better by adding experience points is a big claim, and one not borne out by any evidence that I can see.

And also not one I’ve made.

If anything, the number of people who drop xp is pretty good evidence that it isn't true.

Not at all. The number of people who drop XP is only evidence that many people don’t want to put in the work to use it, not that it isn’t good for the game.

And if xp is only helpful if used well - that was my initial point. It's not always good because it can be used badly. Using the tool well is possible, but a skill, and badly used tools, or tools built for one purpose being used for another incompatible purpose, are bad.

Yes, but the fact that you can smash your fingers with a hammer doesn’t mean a hammer is a bad tool. It is a useful tool, well worth learning to use appropriately.

 

[Charlaquin]

While true, it also seems to mean that by definition the DM is using something that matters to the player but not the PC as motivation.

Sorry, I don’t quite follow?

 

[jmartkdr2]

Yeah, awarding random amounts of XP for random activities is obviously bad. Don’t do that.

No, obviously if they’re used poorly they don’t make the game better. You can say that about literally any game system


And also not one I’ve made.


Not at all. The number of people who drop XP is only evidence that many people don’t want to put in the work to use it, not that it isn’t good for the game.


Yes, but the fact that you can smash your fingers with a hammer doesn’t mean a hammer is a bad tool. It is a useful tool, well worth learning to use appropriately.

If I don't have any nails to drive, why should I buy and master a hammer?

The argument you made in post #289 read as: xp is always more fun than not xp, because getting points is fun, and this fun happens whether we notice it or not.

 

[Lanefan]

I'm not convinced of the basic premise or that the hassle and overhead are worth the extra overhead. Not rewarding XP, not focusing on that aspect of the game has it's own rewards which I think outweigh any hypothetical benefit from granting XP.

Thing is, there's a big difference between rewarding xp and focusing on it.

We use xp; and sure, players like getting them for their characters; but gaining xp and levelling up are rarely if ever a focus of actual play (maybe that's because our level advancement rate is very slow).

When it comes to risk-reward assessment round here, it's usually in terms of treasure potential vs survival potential. Xp almost never enters into the equation, other than an occasional meta-level quip about only needing a few more xp to bump.

 

[Lanefan]

Figuring out how much to award, for what, when, tracking those activities in-game, and then adding it all up.

Figuring out how much xp to award and for what is hard-codified for monsters in all editions, for treasure in one edition, and for some other activities in some other editions.

Tracking it in-game, as noted above, can be trivially easy - I even gave an example as to how.

Yes, it does require the DM to do a bit of arithmetic sometime between sessions; but it doesn't take long.

I can tell you for certain that experience points do not always significantly improve fun. I've seen them ruin fun just as often, either by encouraging un-fun gameplay (just kill everything, only follow the plot, skip rp to go for more points, etc) or create tension and feelings of favoritism, or just be so arbitrary as to lose any sense of reward.

If it's creating feelings of favouritism then the DM is 100% doing something wrong.

And "just kill everything" is rarely if ever un-fun.

The idea that any game would be better by adding experience points is a big claim, and one not borne out by any evidence that I can see. If anything, the number of people who drop xp is pretty good evidence that it isn't true.

My cynical suspicion is that much of the push behind dropping xp is lazy DMs.

 

[Oofta]

Sorry, I don’t quite follow?

Well, presumably the PCs don't have the in-world concept of XP or even leveling per se. People's skills improve over time, but the levels are just a simplification of gradually increasing skill.

So I personally want motivations to come from in-world motivation of the PCs that the players are running. I want the emphasis on decision making to be what makes sense for Grog the Barbarian over what might make sense for Grog's player Joe.

In other words I don't want the players looking at that ogre as 450 XP I want them to see it as a dangerous big dumb brute, a bully. They can fight the ogre, they can try to intimidate it, they can try to trick it, they can decide to try to convince it to change it's ways. No solution to a problem should be "better" than another. I don't want them going to the fiery tower over the idyllic village because they think the tower will allow them to level more quickly, I want them to figure out what their PC would do.

Does that make more sense?

Not that there's a right way or wrong way to play of course.

 

[Oofta]

My cynical suspicion is that much of the push behind dropping xp is lazy DMs.

Lazy, efficient, poe-tae-toe, poe-tah-toe.

 

[Faolyn]

I mean agency over your character advancement. If you just level up when the DM says you do, there’s no specific actions you can take to influence that. You can’t actively pursue character advancement. You just have to accept it when it comes.

Then I still don't understand because I've never really considered leveling up to be the goal. It's an ends to a mean, because it gives you more abilities, but the actual purpose of the game is the communal storytelling and achieving of in-game or in-character goals.

Besides, if you do monster/treasure XP, it's still up to the DM to put the monsters and treasure there, so it still ends up being leveling up when the DM tells you to. The DM just uses a different method of achieving the same thing.

 

[Flamestrike]

Does anyone actually use the daily encounter quota?

Yeah. As the guideline its supposed to be.

I aim for a median adventuring 'day' of around 6 encounters (+/-) and around 2 short rests per long rest, sticking pretty closely to the adventuring day XP budget in the DMG.

I adjust upwards on daily XP slightly due to my PCs having magic items, depending on the items.

When I say adventuring 'day', it doesn't necessarily mean a day; very occasionally it's extended over a few days of in game time, where the PCs cant gain the benefits of a long rest overnight.

 

[Faolyn]

Ideas, bonds, flaws never seen this used. Just takes extra space on the character sheet.

Most of my group loves them. They really help to flesh out characters.