Quote from: robiswrong;781516Nah, that's still a regular party, just one where Simon's not as regular.

What I mean by open-table is this:

Yup, that's what I'm trying to set up to run through Caverns of Thracia with S&W. Not having to concern myself with player churn is so nice and this way I can run Google+ and face to face groups in parallel.

Really looking forward to people finding a horribly trashed room where other PCs had already been and standing around wondering WTF happened here.

This kind of system is really the only one I'd consider using a mega-dungeon for since you don't have to worry about the logistics of PCs meeting up: each sessions starts and ends at town.

Quote from: Bren;781661That ruins the fun for those of us that like running characters at different levels (since they all end up the same level all the time). And it causes some difficulties if you have multiple characters since it makes it difficult to learn the rules for an infrequently run character as they are leveling up 3 times as fast (and possibly skipping entire levels) as your more frequently run character.

Like Bill said "Multiple characters by the same player would be a special case for me."

There is always that ulterior motive in what players are doing.  Whether it's gold=xp or creature=xp doesn't really matter.  It influences people's decision making.

My enjoyment of RPGing is not that, it's getting together and playing pretend.

I'm upfront about it.

Quote from: Bill;781837Multiple characters by the same player would be a special case for me.

Quote from: Sommerjon;781896Like Bill said "Multiple characters by the same player would be a special case for me."

Everybody getting exactly the same experience, especially getting experience for characters who aren't even present in a session would be a special case in for me. Whereas, over the past 40 years people having more than one character has been the default in multiple game systems in various groups and locations when I've played or GMed. Which just goes to show, people do or like different things when they play RPGs.

Quote from: Sommerjon;781896There is always that ulterior motive in what players are doing.

I don't think find it productive to speculate about the ulterior motives behind why people want group experience. It invariable sounds like an attack on the character of those folks who want to play their games in a certain way. So I won't do that. Similarly, I think speculating about ulterior motives behind why people might what separate experience is equally hostile and unproductive.

Quote from: Bren;782129Everybody getting exactly the same experience, especially getting experience for characters who aren't even present in a session would be a special case in for me. Whereas, over the past 40 years people having more than one character has been the default in multiple game systems in various groups and locations when I've played or GMed. Which just goes to show, people do or like different things when they play RPGs.

Never said otherwise.
I even stipulated that in a level based game I don't use xp, however in a skill based game I do.

Quote from: Bren;782129I don't think find it productive to speculate about the ulterior motives behind why people want group experience. It invariable sounds like an attack on the character of those folks who want to play their games in a certain way. So I won't do that. Similarly, I think speculating about ulterior motives behind why people might what separate experience is equally hostile and unproductive.

I find no enjoyment from games that reward certain actions and not others. If you feel that is me attacking, being hostile or unproductive, you go girl.

Quote from: Sommerjon;782206I find no enjoyment from games that reward certain actions and not others.

You could have just said that without also suggesting people who play a different way have "ulterior motives" rather than different preferences.

Quote from: Bren;782220You could have just said that without also suggesting people who play a different way have "ulterior motives" rather than different preferences.

It is ulterior motives. You may not like the bluntness, but you'll get over it eventually.

Quote from: Sommerjon;782238It is ulterior motives. You may not like the bluntness, but you'll get over it eventually.

Cupcake, I don't think you know what the phrase "ulterior motives" even means.

Gold, platinum, goat, princess: It's all the same principle. Only in Advanced was it stipulated that everything not specie must be converted to it to score points, which to me is silly. If there's an adventure in securing real wealth, then all the better I say! What did Fafhrd and Mouser take from their tryst with the Sea King's girls, or many another feat of derring-do?

Leveling-up everyone on a schedule is obviously not going to cut it in the old game form, any more than giving every batter so many bases just for being on the roster would in baseball. The interaction of skill and luck in scoring points is part of the game, part of the fun. Without the chance of lesser outcomes, there simply are no noteworthy successes!

That doesn't need to be where the game is for everyone, and some people prefer something that's not really a challenge at all but simply an entertainment.

Quote from: Bren;782239Cupcake, I don't think you know what the phrase "ulterior motives" even means.

I don't.  I thought it sounded sophisticated.  Please tell me what it means.

Quote from: Phillip;782269Leveling-up everyone on a schedule is obviously not going to cut it in the old game form, any more than giving every batter so many bases just for being on the roster would in baseball. The interaction of skill and luck in scoring points is part of the game, part of the fun. Without the chance of lesser outcomes, there simply are no noteworthy successes!

That doesn't need to be where the game is for everyone, and some people prefer something that's not really a challenge at all but simply an entertainment.

You're right.  I am in this hobby for entertainment reasons.  I've never found D&D to be much of a 'challenge', perhaps it's challenging for you.

Quote from: Phillip;782269Leveling-up everyone on a schedule is obviously not going to cut it in the old game form, any more than giving every batter so many bases just for being on the roster would in baseball. The interaction of skill and luck in scoring points is part of the game, part of the fun. Without the chance of lesser outcomes, there simply are no noteworthy successes!

That doesn't need to be where the game is for everyone, and some people prefer something that's not really a challenge at all but simply an entertainment.

Scoring points? Not sure what you mean, can you clarify?

Quote from: Bill;782526Scoring points? Not sure what you mean, can you clarify?

Treasure as XP exists pretty much just as a means of keeping score.

How much treasure is acquired is a way of keeping score to determine successful adventures vs not so successful ones.  If your party suffers the least casualties while obtaining the best amount of loot then you are "winning".

Quote from: Exploderwizard;782533Treasure as XP exists pretty much just as a means of keeping score.

How much treasure is acquired is a way of keeping score to determine successful adventures vs not so successful ones.  If your party suffers the least casualties while obtaining the best amount of loot then you are "winning".

Similarly, if my PC suffers the least loss for the most gain (XP, gold, magic, levels, power) than with respect to the other players, I have the higher score.

I just roleplay; I must be slacking at keeping score.

Quote from: Bill;782561I just roleplay; I must be slacking at keeping score.

Probably. You could try using a spreadsheet to help you keep track.



Which, unsarcastically, is what I actually do to keep track of the long term Advancement Point awards for all the PCs in my Honor+Intrigue game.