D&D General XP Awards for -- what????

[Vaalingrade]

All this talk of XP for gold reminds me of a time in college when a friend had some old module (no idea what system) that just said you needed to spend gold to level up with zero other explanation.

So our characters ate the gold to gain levels.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I think the answer to you last question is no. I can't imagine it was ever widely implemented as written.

I am 100% in agreement with you there, and I think its been discussed a few times with the consensus being "yeah, we tried that for a couple sessions..." which is exactly what we did right after our pre-ordered 1e DMGs showed up at the store. We read it, we implemented it, we said "WTF!?" and learned that EGG was just another guy at a game store throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks, lol.

As came up on another thread (or earlier in this one?), I think the idea of an XP adjustment for conforming to character class function - which is what the PHB intimates - actually makes more sense, though whether 4 scales are needed is up for grab! You could do it in three steps: didn't conform to alignment or character class function = 2, did one or the other = 1, did both = 0. This could even be done Burning Wheel or Torchbearer style: Did you take an action that significantly violated your alignment? Gain one point. Did you engage in actions during play that significantly departed from class function? Gain one point. Each point is (say) a 15% penalty to earned experience for that session/adventure.

Right, and as I pointed out in response to that, one of the ways to view the XP system of 2e is basically as a patch on the 1e procedure in line with what you are suggesting. In other words, ditch training altogether and simply award XP exclusively for stuff that is in character, conforms to class, and doesn't generate an alignment shift (which is penalized in a different way, though I don't recall what 2e specifically says about it in a generic sense). Anyway, while many prefer to see the 2e XP rules as an attempt to push 'story play', I've always seen it as more like this, just a less klunky version of the training rule, which of course does ultimately try to promote a certain play agenda; thus neither interpretation is 'wrong'.

 

[pemerton]

one of the ways to view the XP system of 2e is basically as a patch on the 1e procedure in line with what you are suggesting. In other words, ditch training altogether and simply award XP exclusively for stuff that is in character, conforms to class, and doesn't generate an alignment shift

I think the issue with 2nd ed AD&D's procedure is that the actual numbers on the XP awards seem a bit arbitrary. Whereas a system of uniform bonuses/penalties along the lines I sketched can be applied to all classes equally provided that they have a reasonably clear function (so maybe monks and bards would make the system wobble a bit).

I think it also offers a solution to the DEX fighter "problem" (if one see it as a problem): when the function of fighters is understood to be primarily leading in melee combat, then a player who builds and plays a sniper-type fighter will take the appropriate penalty. This is a role for assassins (or thieves if, as per UA, they are allowed to use shortbows).

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I think the issue with 2nd ed AD&D's procedure is that the actual numbers on the XP awards seem a bit arbitrary. Whereas a system of uniform bonuses/penalties along the lines I sketched can be applied to all classes equally provided that they have a reasonably clear function (so maybe monks and bards would make the system wobble a bit).

I think it also offers a solution to the DEX fighter "problem" (if one see it as a problem): when the function of fighters is understood to be primarily leading in melee combat, then a player who builds and plays a sniper-type fighter will take the appropriate penalty. This is a role for assassins (or thieves if, as per UA, they are allowed to use shortbows).

Well, a lot of 2e is a very clunky system...

 

[pemerton]

Well, a lot of 2e is a very clunky system...

I think the a lot in your sentence is a bit misleading!

 

[Aldarc]

All this talk of XP for gold reminds me of a time in college when a friend had some old module (no idea what system) that just said you needed to spend gold to level up with zero other explanation.

So our characters ate the gold to gain levels.

And then your characters became dragons.