Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Arravis" data-source="post: 2551204" data-attributes="member: 327">There are a couple issues I’d like to understandWhy should in-game mechanics be used to deal with personal issues in the group?Why do some people have issues with events occurring to PC’s that aren’t present (of course it’s much preferred they be). The characters are an integral part of the story and help me shape my plot and game world as much as I help them shape their characters. I don’t see the gulf between DM and PC that so many seem to. We’re both making the world; we’re both making the character, together.Why is XP such a sore point with people? My game isn’t a job, it isn’t the military. I don’t see why you have to “earn your chops” or some other thing like that. It’s simply an activity friends do together. Why are people bothering to compare themselves to their fellow players, seeing how much XP they have and if they “earned” it? I’m not trying to find out who is the “better” player. Why does that matter? How does that add to the fun? Some has said, “such is life, if you miss out, you miss out.” I’m not looking for harsh real-life in my games; there’s enough of that already. The game should be about fun.I don’t see XP as a reward, only another game mechanic to progress the story along. The important contributions I’m looking for from my players is them adding to the overall gaming experience. They do this by having interesting characters that are well role-played, not how many spells were cast or what monsters they happened to kill. In my games, I’m looking for a sense of wonder not XP. If all I wanted to see were the numbers on my character sheet go up, I’ll go play one of a million CRPGs.Having characters fall behind in XP from the other characters doesn’t add to the game. It only decreases the fun. I’ve never seen an intense that it made a game better. The player who is left behind is unhappy, as is everyone else in the group because that character is less effective. I don’t see what it buys you.Comparing D&D to chess or pretty much anything that isn’t a role-playing game is an exercise in frustration. There’s pretty much nothing analogous to role-playing in any sort of game. Monopoly, checkers, chess, risk, etc… all those are as unrelated to D&D as apples and uranium.To answer some questions:If a player doesn’t show, I don’t judge his excuse and figure how much XP he gets based on that. I don’t, expect a doctor’s note, or any other nonsense. I expect my players to be there for as many games as possible. If they miss so many games as to become disruptive, I’ll ask them to bow out of the game.ThirdWizard I think your summary was pretty dead on.Grimstaff you need to rethink your post. Many of us posting here have published game material, on Enworld it’s often safe to assume competence over incompetence (one of the reasons I love this site <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=":)" />). Trust me, complexity isn’t the issue, neither is it a “weak spine.” As far as what the rules have to say about it… Rule 0: You get to decide how the rules work, which rules to use, and how strictly to adhere to them.</blockquote>

Verification