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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gorgoroth" data-source="post: 7650007" data-attributes="member: 6674889">"I absolutely agree that D&D is a combat-centric system, but it is worth noting that in 4e at least, XP rewards for non-combat challenges is no longer a suggestion but a part of the core rules. Like them or loathe them, Skill Challenges are definitely there to provide XP for the sort of things you describe in this paragraph, which I find to be a welcome change of pace from "you could maybe think about giving XP for non-combat stuff, if you're that kind of GM""Yeah, our groups disliked them so much due to being so bland, that nobody used them more than once or twice, leading back to the same result. 4e tried to encode skill challenges as xp-worthy, except that XP was the same across all classes, and that's a criticism of 3e too. Having the same XP is saying that when a wizard turns 5th level, it's the same as a cleric turning 5th. Not. at. all. But two equal levelled characters is fine, when one is a wizard and one is a fighter, since the wizard PC will have to play that much smarter to earn the much higher XP threshold. Actually this opens up a tons of new options, since if you have exponential or geometric xp progression like earlier editions had, you can much more easily have varying levels in the group and it still work. This in turns also allows the deadlier gameplay, because you are supposed to die. Removing PC death from something the players worry about is what ruined D&D4 (IMO). Why would I care about getting more XP? Just award levels and be done with it. The wizard uses the same to-hit charts are the fighter, has similar HP and defenses (ok not exactly, but a 4e wizard is much tougher than earlier edition melee types in comparison...our wizard in 4e used like three surges in the entire campaign, and never dropped once. it was absurd, he just didn't care any more. also, same for our warden, he wasn't even optimized and he was unkillable. the game was utterly boring as a result). Awarding XP is only meaningful when there is real risk of death...then earning more XP by doing even riskier things for greater/earlier rewards is a real headscratcher and makes you worry for the safety and the outcome of that dice roll. Every +1 will count, you will bide your time to get advantage, or do what it takes. that's REALLY fun to me. to taste life, risk death. As a videogame developer, I yearn for the days when you can't save/reload ad nauseum since easymode games are not as good. Challenge is key. Skill "challenges" where there is no or little inherent risk of actual, permanent, sudden PC death are yet another treadmill of boredom that I can do without. At least 4e combat succeeded in being tactical, like a board game. Skill challenges were just a contrived series of rolls. Utter failure on every level, game design, fun, player+dm interest in the game, player+dm interest in optimising anything but combat combos (since out of combat encounters your entire character sheet was next to useless...how can you use an "encounter power" if you're not in an encounter? ugh...more fail.)</blockquote>

Verification