Quote from: robiswrong;780793The thing for me is they're both *goal* oriented, vs. *process* oriented.

GP for XP works for me in a heavy dungeon-crawl game, but outside of that I think it starts showing a few cracks.

Technically if the characters only goal was to acquire gold, that would become the group goal system I prefer.

But the gold itself is boring to me; it's what you can do with it that I like.

Raise a army, build a temple to yourself, bribe a king, etc...

Quote from: Daztur;780226Cow = XP

I like this one.  Very celtic and tribal.

Hellfrost (for Savage Worlds) has a cattle raid sub-system, so stealing the rival village's cattle has specific rules support.  I always liked that.  (But Savage Worlds uses a "chunky" xp system where every 5 xp gains you an Advance, so it doesn't lend itself to fine-grained xp award systems.)

And that reminds me of Hellfrost's "telling the tale" phase, where you can gain glory for boasting of your exploits.  Certain glory thresholds give you benefits, but in the context you're talking about that's taking the long way around.  You could go straight to boasting of your exploits = XP.  So its not stealing treasures that levels you up, or even slaying monsters, but actually letting people know you were the guy who did it.  You might even get more xp if you can embellish the tale without getting caught out in a lie and disbelieved.

What else...  Crafting = XP?  I'm not too committed to this one, but I can see it working for certain characters in, say, an L5R game for instance.  Craftsmen and artists ought to be able to get better by practice to begin with, and being an artisan is one path to influence and insight in Rokugan.

Quote from: Artifacts of Amber;780819I personally almost always level as I see fit. My players trust me and it was at a progression that kept them happy and me as well.

For level based games, I always tell the group when to level up.

How about insanity = xp ?

I think this would work particularly well for D&D. The sane are powerless and only the mad thrive isn't far removed from your regular murder hobo game.

It'll certainly ensure that whenever everybody runs away from something, the PCs run straight to it.

Games where players are given XP to improve their characters create a strong incentive for players to only do decisions that bring more XP. For example if your system rewards kills from monsters every encounter becomes combat. Alternatively a system where you reward points for fulfilling the adventure goals makes it more advantageous to avoid combat encounters (that only waste gaming time) and concentrate on fulfilling the quest.

I have been thinking that  rewarding players for coming to play (with fixed XP given at every session) would be best (with bonus for ending the adventure either successfully or even failing). All adventure  styles and types and missions would be equal and thus players would have incentive to play role rather than a kick murder squad...

Yeah, after initially liking it, I now conclude that 3e's video game-like 'kill monsters for xp and loot' is a TERRIBLE idea.

Quote from: Sommerjon;780946For level based games, I always tell the group when to level up.

This is my preferred method in level based games.

Quote from: Will;780976Yeah, after initially liking it, I now conclude that 3e's video game-like 'kill monsters for xp and loot' is a TERRIBLE idea.

Yes it is. However, it all depends on what kind of game you want to achieve. D&D makers obviously want to put a lot of emphasis on combat system and most spells are geared towards combat. Thus making players incentives to do combat highlights the design emphasis of game. Being sociopath is natural in D&D.

However, if you gear your XP system to loot gained, the adventures would become essentially robberies. Then you'd see a lot of assassins and thieves and emphasis on guard alertness and route plotting in adventures. That would require emphasis on entirely different set of skills and mechanisms.

In the end it all boils down to what is the goal of players to do in game and how you reward them for doing those things. It is simple Game Design 101.

Quote from: Bill;780980This is my preferred method in level based games.

For level-based games where there's a presumption of party consistency, and especially if there's a "plot" that will be followed (regardless of how railroady/not railroady it is), yeah, I'd agree.

If you're doing an open-table, dungeon-centric game, I think "traditional" XP works fine.

Quote from: Nikita;781009Yes it is. However, it all depends on what kind of game you want to achieve. D&D makers obviously want to put a lot of emphasis on combat system and most spells are geared towards combat. Thus making players incentives to do combat highlights the design emphasis of game. Being sociopath is natural in D&D.

And it's worth noting that D&D switched from an exploration/'robbery' game to being a combat focused game (at least in how it was commonly played) somewhere between 1e and 2e.  And it still shows a lot of cruft from that change.

I always have had a soft spot for Palladium's way of gaining XP - through doing heroic deeds and role playing. Killing stuff got you very little XP, and gold and shit didn't get you anything.

However, bookkeeping is a chore, as it is geared toward XP for individuals, rather than the group. So unlike DnD, you have to calculate each character's XP, instead of just dividing a lump sum evenly.

Quote from: everloss;781038I always have had a soft spot for Palladium's way of gaining XP - through doing heroic deeds and role playing. Killing stuff got you very little XP, and gold and shit didn't get you anything.

However, bookkeeping is a chore, as it is geared toward XP for individuals, rather than the group. So unlike DnD, you have to calculate each character's XP, instead of just dividing a lump sum evenly.

I used to think that giving out XP for role-playing was good idea until I started to think that there is no real way to evaluate what players do anyways in game. Now I think that giving players points for doing "bastardly deeds" that advance the plot towards solution of adventure is in my view a good incentive. It keeps adventure moving forwards and rewards progress.

After some soul searching in game design books I have now moved to camp of giving a sum of collected XP divided evenly to everyone participating in session. Its main advantages are psychological: Team succeeds and fails together. Thus failures have no one to blame directly and they are felt as a common and equal hardship to all. Similarly team success is higher when players work together and move towards adventure solution and this is rewarded as a team effort where everyone can feel they participated and did something together. Yes, I stress social aspect in role playing as a way of getting players to enjoy the game.

One reason I distrust most subjective evaluations for xp (like role play) is that it naturally sets up tension -- the player wants xp, the GM is judging the player as worthy, or not, of xp.

This may work fine in many cases, but it is likely to expand table drama.

Plus, it's a distraction -- if you don't like how involved someone is in the game, cowboy up and discuss it with them.

We're running an old school game, and I feel we more or less have to hand out XP's for loot and such. Otherwise, classes that progress quickly, like Rogues and Clerics, will lose a key advantage.  That's my rational, anyway...

Quote from: Nikita;781044I used to think that giving out XP for role-playing was good idea until I started to think that there is no real way to evaluate what players do anyways in game. Now I think that giving players points for doing "bastardly deeds" that advance the plot towards solution of adventure is in my view a good incentive. It keeps adventure moving forwards and rewards progress.

I like all of your points, and agree. I think I mis-typed when I mentioned "role playing," as in that particular system, you get XP for "coming up with a good idea that helps the team," and "potentially sacrificing your life for the team or a group of people," and "playing in character."

Playing in Character is only a 50 or 100 point bonus (I don't remember off the top of my head), but self sacrifice is 1000 (the highest amount of XP available by any single action). Defeating a minor menace is 25, by comparison, and defeating a major menace is 150.

It always struck me funny that Rifts is treated as a munchkin kill-everything-that-moves game, but the experience system is completely the opposite of that mentality.

I've been long considering using that system for LotFP, but dividing it evenly among the PCs. That way, like you said, the team as a whole is encouraged to do more stuff. I haven't tried it out yet though. I've never liked the whole, "this creature is worth X amount of experience" or experience = gold systems. I understand the logic behind them and the ease on the GM, but I just don't care for them.

I have explained how I do XP a few times.

It emerged as a combination of setting objectives for staff at work, trying to set XP awards that I felt were useful, avoided gold is all that matters, and kill stuff is all we care about, and AMBER. In Amber its hard for the GM to set PC goals becuase the PC are much more likely to fuck off and invent their own plots than they are to follow the GM's and you actually want to encourage that.

So ... this is how it works.

Each PC has 3 personal objectives. An Objective must include overcoming a challenge. So learning the flute , as commendable as it might be is not a challenge, become the best flautist in town by winning the Annual flute challenge... is a challenge.

The GM sets an award for sucessful completion of the challenge. The award depends on the difficulty and the risk. PCs are better off splitting an objective into bite sized chunks. So .... Avenge my father's death, is an epic objective but might be better if you start with "Find out who killed my father", "trace the current whearabouts of Count Olaf", "Kill Count Olaf". These are not just xp awards they are adventure hooks and they pull the party into the game world.
As a PC compeltes an objective they get a new one. If they drop an objective before its complete (note this is different from spliting it into stages) they loose some XP

In addition to these there are "adventure" based objectives but you need to be careful here. As adventure hooks often only reward the behaviour the GM wants to see so can be railroady. If you have an adventure Hook of Rescue the Princess you are in effect precluding there being any benefit in capturing the princess and ransoming her off, or eating her heart to gian control over her ghost or whatever.
So I keep adventure rewards Neutral where possible.
In a Typical "rescue the Princess adventure" with risks suitable for a begining party I might include the following adventure rewards (which are split across each PC that participates in this element).

Discover how the Princess was kidnapped - 300xp
Identify the person in the royal house who betrayed the princess - 500 xp
Identify the kings dark secret - 1000 xp
Discover the Princesses current location - 500 xp
etc

A Player in this setting might then give themselves an objective of become the King's visir and achiet it through blackmail etc