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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 8238452" data-attributes="member: 6779196">No problem! I appreciate the earnestness with which you strive for clarity on others’ perspectives.It depends on what XP is awarded for. In a game where you get XP for killing monsters, pursuing it effectively means approaching challenges with a kill first, ask questions later attitude, as killing is what earns you XP. Trying to seek peaceful solutions to problems would be an ineffective way to pursue advancement. In a game where you get XP for acquiring gold, effective pursuit of advancement means careful risk-reward management, taking on quests that offer the largest monetary reward proportional to the danger involved, and generally trying to circumvent challenges in order to acquire treasure with minimal conflict. Fighting dangerous foes with little money or selflessly offering to help poor villagers with their plights with no expectation of compensation would be an ineffective way to pursue advancement. In an adventure where you gained XP for discovering points of interest, effective pursuit of advancement would involve hunting for rumors of interesting locations and exploring uncharted areas. Sticking to well-known travel routes would be an ineffective way to pursue advancement. In a mystery campaign where you gained XP for discovering clues, effective pursuit of advancement would mean being very thorough in your investigations, even when you think you have the solution, because solving a case when there are still clues to be found would be ineffective pursuit of advancement.In my own campaigns, my go-to is to award XP for completing objectives and overcoming encounters. Effective pursuit of advancement would mean taking on quests when offered, seeing them through to completion, and engaging with challenges whenever they arise, by the most efficient means possible. Refusing quests or trying to avoid conflict would be inefficient means of pursuing advancement in one of my typical campaigns. But I’ll use different  systems for awarding XP for different campaigns, when I feel it’s appropriate.As a player, I’m fine with whatever XP system is available; as long as I know what I can earn XP for, I can make decisions that influence my character’s advancement. I can take on quests or encounters that will earn me XP, or decide not to, if I don’t think the risks are worth the potential for advancement. I have a degree of agency over my character’s advancement. If the DM is strongly opposed to using XP for some reason, I will settle for session-based advancement. Then I can still monitor my progress towards the next level (albeit in terms of sessions left to level up instead of XP), and I know that the most optimal way to pursue advancement is simply to come to as many sessions as possible. The one thing I don’t go in for is story-based advancement, where I really have no way of knowing how close I am to leveling up and no way of influencing it. All I can really do is follow the plot, maybe favoring things that seem likely to be on the critical path over side-content, and accept the level-ups whenever they come. No real agency there.Sure. Obviously I’m not going to feel exactly what my character feels, but empathizing with them is a good way to describe it. I come from an acting background, and specifically a Misnerian school of thought, so to me having a genuine emotional reaction to an artificial scenario comes pretty naturally, and is a huge part of what I’m after as a player. But, yeah, obviously you want to experience your character’s perspective in a safe way.So... Let me use one specific means of awarding XP as an example. Let’s use XP for gold, because it’s an easy one to illustrate my point with. XP for gold is great for campaigns featuring morally ambiguous protagonists who are in it for the money. Conan-esque Sword and Sorcery, for example. Having XP for gold in such a campaign helps me immerse myself in the character by making the best way for me to get what I want (XP) the same as the best way for my character to get what they want (gold). Now, that’s a bit of an oversimplification, but it gets the point across. In such a campaign, the protagonists ought to be motivated primarily by a desire for gold. By tying the game’s primary player reward system directly to what ought to motivate protagonists in the setting, you encourage the players to create characters who fit the campaign’s themes. Not just through the social contract, but through their brain’s reward system. It’s easier to sync up my experience with my character experience when I get dopamine for pursuing the same things that motivate my character. Does that make sense?I just don’t see the value in trying to separate those things. Why not play a character who is motivated to make decisions that are a positive influence on others’ experience? It’s a cooperative game, shouldn’t my character be as invested in supporting their party members as I am in supporting the other players?That certainly could be. Though, I rather think not.Hopefully it did, but to try to summarize: I’m trying to use the tool to incentivize through game mechanics the sort of play that is thematically and tonally suited to the campaign. To eliminate or at least reduce the disconnect between “what my character would do” and “what the game rewards me for doing.”I think if the game is boring if you succeed as quickly and easily as possible, it has problems that milestone leveling won’t fix. In a well-designed game, “as quickly and easily as possible” and “long enough and difficult enough to be interesting” should be in the same ballpark at the very least.Do you not want your character to get what they want? If not, I can only imagine that would lead to gameplay where you are constantly in conflict between trying to play your character faithfully and trying to avoid them getting what they want as a result. That sounds awful. As a player, I want to be striving to achieve my character’s goals. And as a DM, I want my players to strive to achieve their characters’ goals. In fact, it’s kind of necessary, so I can put obstacles in the way of those goals for them to strive against, creating the emergent gameplay and story in the process.The player wants XP. The character wants... something. If the player gets XP when their character gets what they want, the gameplay goals and the narrative goals will be in concert. To use a somewhat pretentious bit of game-designery jargon, it creates ludonarrative harmony.Now, granted, if the player doesn’t want XP, that line of logic isn’t really sound. But I’ve never seen a new player who didn’t want XP. In my (heh) experience, players not caring about XP is a learned thing. Somewhere along the line, someone tells them they shouldn’t play D&D like it’s a “game” they can “win” and that they should compartmentalize their player motivations from their character’s motivations and act purely based on the latter. That they should focus on “role playing instead of roll playing.” That they should learn to love failure because it can be just as interesting as success. That’s all bologna in my opinion. It’s a roleplaying game, it involves both roleplaying and game, and the game’s design should aim not to put those two things into conflict. Ludonarrative harmony should be the goal, but for some reason people on the internet actively push players towards fostering ludonarrative dissonance.Sure, and in my opinion a well designed roleplaying game should have mechanics that reward you for doing so, so that you don’t have to compromise between playing your character’s foibles and making decisions with the aim of leading to your character’s success. That’s why I actually love the idea behind 5e’s personality traits, ideals, bonds, and flaws. I have quibbles over their execution, but the idea of rewarding players for portraying personality traits which may be detrimental to the characters’ immediate success with a currency that can be used to improve their chances of long-term success is excellent. If executed well, such a mechanic could help reduce the conflict between “how I imagine my character would act” and “what I as a player who is invested in my character’s success think would be the best thing to do.”For sure.</blockquote>

Verification