If you read what I was responding to, it will give more context to my reply. I'll break it down...
In brief, GMs should reward the behavior they want to see at the gaming table.
So the GM steers the players to do what the GM wants them to do by rewarding XP for the "right" things. This is classic Forgethink, and manifests in their games as the idea that games are "about something" and that players should "address the premise" of the game and the story-based mechanics that give concrete benefits to players for roleplaying their character (ie. training those knuckle-dragging gamists to stop rollplaying and be proper storytellers by giving them mechanical benefits when they do so).
This the same kind of horseshit as "D&D is all about combat", or "all about the DungeonCrawl" or "all about resource tracking" or "all about X". Any roleplaying game is much, much broader than some jackass Designer's or GM's "premise".
Gary did not do "XP for Gold and killing" because the game was to be solely about DungeonCrawling, kicking in doors, killing things and taking their stuff. We know this because he spent a quarter of the damn DMG talking about other types of campaigns.
It was an abstract approximation,
nothing more. Not defining a Trope, not setting a playstyle in stone, an abstract approximation.
As adventurers adventure, they get better at adventuring. That's it. That's all. It's an abstraction, however, therefore gaining XP by killing things could make you better at Climbing.
If they want a game where PCs kill monsters, give XP for that. If they want a game where PCs rob and plunder, give XP for that. If they want a game where people solve social intrigues, give XP for that. If they want a game where PCs further the goals of an patron, guild or affiliation, give XP for that.
Giving 'blanket' XP simply for showing up is ridiculous. XP is a reward, not an expectation.
Now here he is reinforcing what I said above, for this point of view, the game is "about something" and if I want a D&D game about Diplomacy more than combat, I should give out Diplomacy XP awards and deemphasize Combat XP awards. If I do so, I am treating players like dogs chasing the right kind of treat. Chase the rabbit, get a treat, chase the cat, get a shock.
In this view of XP, experience is not the natural progression of sentient beings becoming better at something, no, XP is a GM-issued reward
to the Player for "behaving correctly". I think if you weren't fired up, and saw Zweihander's post by itself, you might toss a couple "Fuck Yous" thataway, because you don't strike me as someone who plays to "behave correctly" and please the GM by undertaking the behavior he wants you to like a good little boy.
Rewarding XP for killing monsters like a fighter is "idiotic Forge-think"?
If I decide that in this game you are supposed to kill monsters, so I give you XP as a fighter for killing monsters, but I don't give you XP for killing humans, then yes, that is idiotic Forge-Think.
So is giving XP to rob and plunder like a thief using his skills.
If I give your thief XP for stealing from the Evil Temple but do not give him XP for stealing from the Good King (thus rewarding the behavior I want to see) then yes, that is "Idiotic ForgeThink".
D&D, as I mentioned above, awarded XP in an abstracted way, but it could lead to OOC decisionmaking, such as if I encounter Goblins I can...
- Deal with them Diplomatically and get the "Defeat" award, but not the "Treasure" award.
- Kill them and take their stuff thus getting both "Defeat" and "Treasure" awards.
- Deal with them for the "Defeat" award, then sneak back and steal their stuff, getting the "Treasure" award without risking combat, but with a lower likelihood of success.
If I'm close to a level and will need both awards to advance a level, then things the character has no way of knowing enter the player's decision-making process. We had
a whole nother thread about this specific issue.
If I get XP for adventuring, period (ie. based on time playing) then none of those choices is incentivized by the game. Doing any of the three, as well as a 4th option...
- Use my Thief abilities to scout the entire lair undetected, making note of all the goblins and all their treasure and then selling the intel to the local lord or using it to leverage my membership in a good adventuring party.
..are now all equally valid. Freedom. The universe is no longer declaring that "adventuring" must be done in the sub-hierarchy of literary tropes III.F.1 through III.H.7.
It's not some kind of "reward for showing up" it's just an abstracted way of saying
"As adventurers adventure, they get better at adventuring." Where have I heard that before...oh yeah, D&D.
Basically all the OP's system is doing is abstracting XP in a different way
with an eye towards removing OOC concerns. That's it. That's all.
Now, the tone was theatrical and aggressive, but this is a site created and run by essentially, a theatrical, aggressive persona.
theRPGsite, of all places, is fucking
tone-policing now?
To all the people bitching about the OP's
attitude, your guy's Kung-Fu is
getting fucking weak.
I'd use the "Go back to the Enworld/Forge/RPG.net" sign emoticons separated with rotfl, but we don't have those anymore.
BTW, the Avatar's not fair. Even the Hulk can only get so mad at Han Solo.