Quote from: VisionStorm on June 26, 2023, 08:41:57 AM
And XP for gold makes no sense either. Gold (or whatever) amount found has no direct correlation with personal growth (only financial), and stuff like paying obscene amounts for training is just an ad hoc rationalization to justify XP for exact gold amount.

You mean like the fastest way to advance in Runequest 2 is to pay for training? Which cost a lot to undertake.  Or the fact in the latest version of Runequest, you still can pay for training or spend time in-game researching.

Or GURPS which has a subsystem to handle training and how long it takes to improve various skills. And that subsystem in the same section where they talk about job income and cost of living.

Granted how Runequest, GURPS, and some other handles this is more straightforward, D&D's method is just more abstract. The fact is that training takes time, time cost money (or resources) in order to live.

Now I ditched Gold for XP in my D&D campaigns however if it came up that there was an opportunity for a PC to train, I would figure the cost and the benefits in the form of additional XP.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 26, 2023, 11:05:48 AM
Not liking what D&D is all about isn't some kind of crime. Play the games that suit your interests.

  Tell it to Pundit:

Quote from: TheRPGPundit link=https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/how-less-choices-make-rpg-play-better/msg1256469/#msg1256469
People who like 4e and hate the OSR are objectively bad humans.

   

Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 26, 2023, 11:05:48 AM
There are certain elements that make D&D what it is. Without defining elements there is no longer a unique identity.

What elements are those? Maybe just the top 10? I wouldn't count training costs, taxes and upkeep in my top 10, but IMMV.

Come to think of it, I don't remember training costs even existing in the original D&D.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 26, 2023, 11:05:48 AM
Nothing wrong with different games but when it comes to D&D as designed there comes a point where you are no longer playing it.

Then what the objective test? Actual Play? I can say that all the players in my campaigns felt like they playing AD&D and having fun doing it.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 26, 2023, 11:05:48 AM
There are certain elements that make D&D what it is. Without defining elements there is no longer a unique identity.

As the OSR has demonstrated consistently for 15 years through numerous examples of actual play what is "D&D" even when limited to its classic editions is extraordinary far broader than what people give credit for.

That fact you really like the setting that is implied by Classic D&D RAW. Doesn't make games, like mine, that choose to run different settings with different assumptions any less D&D.

Is there any limit? Of course. There are many authors that try to leverage OSR as a form of branding or marketing for their  non-D&D efforts. Yet the core of the OSR centered on the classic edition keeps chugging along with a mix of authors and hobbyists that changes slowly across the decades.

Thematically, Lamentations of the Flame Princess is very different from the world painted by Gary Gygax in AD&D yet Raggi's works are still found useful for D&D campaigns by many hobbyists. As James Raggi still uses D&D mechanics extensively in his works.

Quote from: estar on June 26, 2023, 11:15:40 AM

Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 26, 2023, 11:05:48 AM
Nothing wrong with different games but when it comes to D&D as designed there comes a point where you are no longer playing it.

Then what the objective test? Actual Play? I can say that all the players in my campaigns felt like they playing AD&D and having fun doing it.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 26, 2023, 11:05:48 AM
There are certain elements that make D&D what it is. Without defining elements there is no longer a unique identity.

As the OSR has demonstrated consistently for 15 years through numerous examples of actual play what is "D&D" even when limited to its classic editions is extraordinary far broader than what people give credit for.

That fact you really like the setting that is implied by Classic D&D RAW. Doesn't make games, like mine, that choose to run different settings with different assumptions any less D&D.

Is there any limit? Of course. There are many authors that try to leverage OSR as a form of branding or marketing for their  non-D&D efforts. Yet the core of the OSR centered on the classic edition keeps chugging along with a mix of authors and hobbyists that changes slowly across the decades.

Thematically, Lamentations of the Flame Princess is very different from the world painted by Gary Gygax in AD&D yet Raggi's works are still found useful for D&D campaigns by many hobbyists. As James Raggi still uses D&D mechanics extensively in his works.

Well as far as awarding XP for roleplay and player directed objectives these can be very different things. GURPS awards XP for how well you roleplay the character that was created lovingly point by point by the player. Success or failure depends on faithfully roleplaying the character. I like the GURPS system a great deal but that doesn't make it D&D no matter how much I enjoy it. I like both games for different reasons. Sometimes awarding XP for player directed goals being achieved and good roleplay come into conflict. Suppose the group's goal was accomplished and was a smashing success. Innocent villagers had to be slaughtered in the process but that was the price of victory. Should the LG paladin be awarded full points or should alignment be ditched too because its too rigid?  What if the player mission goal for the game month was to spend it drinking, gambling & whoring? How much XP would they get?

Anyone should change anything they wish to give the participants the gaming experience desired. Those changes may lead the game in different directions from D&D. For an excellent example pertinent to this discussion, check out the childrens story " Mexicali Soup". It has a very interesting lesson to teach.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 26, 2023, 12:10:48 PM
For an excellent example pertinent to this discussion, check out the childrens story " Mexicali Soup". It has a very interesting lesson to teach.

Nice except the lesson I get out of it is how to use one's kitchen and its utensils to tailor the soup to each individual's taste. Rather than think I can only make a single type of soup called Mexcali Soup. And that is the point of the following reply. To get you think of classic D&D as being the kitchen and its utensil rather than it being the soup itself. The same applies to D&D 5e, GURPS, etc. They are all kitchens and utensils capable of creating the same variety of delicious meals.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 26, 2023, 12:10:48 PM
the character that was created lovingly point by point by the player.

This level of detail can be handled equally well by notes written on a sheet of paper written by somebody who knows the kind of character they want to play in the referee's setting or has a referee willing to coach them through the process.

The point of GURPS fleshing all this out is not to create a set of boardgame-like moves and rolls but to help the players act as their character and help describe what their character is doing. There are other ways to accomplish this than through mechanics. Neither approach is better overall but one may be better for a particular group than the other.

Thus the fact D&D is silent in terms of mechanics compared doesn't preclude the possibility of characters with detailed personalities and rich backgrounds from being part of a campaign.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 26, 2023, 12:10:48 PM
I like the GURPS system a great deal but that doesn't make it D&D no matter how much I enjoy it. I like both games for different reasons.

Most folks who want to play my campaign come for the setting and the fact I am known for letting players trash it. I used to be picky about the systems I used. But now that I am more experienced I made multiple system work equally well. So I will focus on the one that is most comfortable and fun for the group to play. Whether that is GURPS, AGE, classic D&D, 5e, and so on.

The trick is what GURPS describes on page 492

QuoteThe GM's task during the game is simple. All he has to do is listen to the players describe what they're doing, then use the rules of the game to tell them what happens, so they can describe what they want to do next . . . and so on. Well, perhaps it's not quite that simple!

Describe first and roll second I found over time can be applied to any number of systems. There are limits but they are so broad it still leaves me with a wide variety of setting that I can use to run my settings like the Majestic Wilderlands.

When it comes to D&D and what players get out of it, I found it not gold for XP or any number of other peripheral elements. No, it is the fact you have classes, levels, hit points, armor classes, initiative along with some other elements. It is fine for a D&D campaign to use Gold for XP but I found it is not necessary. Instead I came up with a more generalized system of milestone XP that will reward both the player who want as much gold as they get, the players who keen on trashing my setting, the players who just want to explore some corner of my world, and along with other types of goals. It also handles players who decide to change their priorities mid-campaign when they find something more interesting to interact with.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 26, 2023, 12:10:48 PM
Sometimes awarding XP for player directed goals being achieved and good roleplay come into conflict.

There is no conflict between goals and roleplaying in my campaigns. I require first person roleplaying and how the players acts as their character is how they act.

But there are consequences as you will see.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 26, 2023, 12:10:48 PM
Suppose the group's goal was accomplished and was a smashing success. Innocent villagers had to be slaughtered in the process but that was the price of victory.

If innocent villagers are killed then the NPCs my setting will act accordingly with the information they have. That the basic gist of my approach, good or bad, how life unfolds in my setting will reward or punish the players. Sometime both.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 26, 2023, 12:10:48 PM
Should the LG paladin be awarded full points or should alignment be ditched too because its too rigid? 

The paladin would get full XP, experience is experience. However that paladin would find the following happening.

QuoteBreaking Your Oath
A paladin is their deity's hand within the Majestic Fantasy Realms. This bond is manifests as a paladin's oath. However, paladins are mortal and as mortals some will decide to let their own interests come before their deity's call. As result the Paladin's Oath is broken and the connection to their deity is severed.

Actions that result in breaking your paladin oath include but not limited to are: ignoring or doing the opposite of the deity's tenets, and ignoring a call to quest from your deity to pursue another goal.

The consequences of this are severe. Several class features will cease to be usable by the Paladin. They are listed below.

The above is from my 5e version of a Paladin of Delaquain Goddess of Honor and Justice.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/14tb9GDzhYMrJj1YEZsowdoYwLLYjcN5w/view?usp=sharing

I have similar version for my GURPS notes and Majestic Fantasy RPG (classic D&D).

And the tenets are clearly spelled out for each type of holy warrior like a paladin.

QuoteFive-fold Code
Show no fear to your enemies even when all is lost.
Let truth guide your life even unto death.
Let the light of goodness and bravery guide you into Delaquain's love.
Protect the helpless as you would protect Delaquain herself.
For what man is a man who does not make the world better?

So in the example you gave the paladin is clearly violating the fourth tenet of the Five-fold Code to protect the helpless. I am assuming that in your example that options existed that could have led to victory without the villagers being slain. That the villagers were killed because it was the easy way to accomplish the goal and the paladin was complicit in that solution.

And if you read the PDF, I outline the process by which a repentant paladin can renew their oath. There are also two other options. One is one of the few times I will allow multi-class in 5e is that the paladin character start taking fighter levels. In my Majestic Fantasy RPG, paladins will only progress as a fighter.  The other option is that the paladin embraces chaos and becomes a chaos knight.

The goal of my XP system isn't force any particular type of behavior in a D&D (or other system) game. The only goal is to encourage players to interact with the setting in a manner they find fun or interesting. Unlike many referees, I don't get bent when the players go left and right. I learn to roll with it and figure out interesting adventures from the party going left instead of right. Even to the point of saying "OK folks I need to end early and work on this for next week" even tho a bunch of prep just made it useless.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 26, 2023, 12:10:48 PM
or should alignment be ditched too because is too rigid? 

I don't use alignment. Players acts as their chracter however they want and the NPCs of my setting respond accordingly with the information they have.

Certain classes require the players to be part of an organization or be bound to some type of code or ethos. If they violate that code or ethos then they will lose certain benefits like being able to cast divine spells. And this is describe as much as possible in-game. Some classes like the Mages of the Order of Thoth don't have immediate consequences.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 26, 2023, 12:10:48 PM
What if the player mission goal for the game month was to spend it drinking, gambling & whoring? How much XP would they get? 

That fine and if they doing a great job of drinking, gambling & whoring then they would get as much XP as saving the village. The part you are missing that a life of drinking, gambling, & whoring isn't without complications that make for adventures. Maybe not a dungeon crawl. But the player in question will soon find out they have complications to deal with that could be bad or good for them.

For example they decide that the Blue Dolphin Inn is their favorite place but quickly learn that a local gang of longshoremen also frequent the place and make the other patrons life (and the proprietor's) life miserable. The PC like how I roleplayed everybody else and decides to stick up for the inn. Right there a challenge leading to adventure that leads to XP.

The way I weigh milestones is in terms of how consequential the achieved goal is for the players (and the group when it matters). The award for saving the world is easy to decide on. However for a player helping set things right for a local drunk and his family can be just as consequential.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 26, 2023, 12:10:48 PM
Anyone should change anything they wish to give the participants the gaming experience desired. Those changes may lead the game in different directions from D&D.

So what? The only direction that being changed is what Gygax envisioned his mechanics being used for. I don't feel that relevant if I can see them being used in another way. Also not everything found in the core rulebooks is part of the system. Much of it are aides to help making a campaign easier. If those aides like encounter tables and what you award XP for doesn't work for you. Then jettison them. All you doing is same thing that happened in the Mexcali story. Using D&D's kitchen and utensils to prepare a different type of delicious meal.

Quote from: estar on June 26, 2023, 11:06:53 AM

Quote from: VisionStorm on June 26, 2023, 08:41:57 AM
And XP for gold makes no sense either. Gold (or whatever) amount found has no direct correlation with personal growth (only financial), and stuff like paying obscene amounts for training is just an ad hoc rationalization to justify XP for exact gold amount.

You mean like the fastest way to advance in Runequest 2 is to pay for training? Which cost a lot to undertake.  Or the fact in the latest version of Runequest, you still can pay for training or spend time in-game researching.

Or GURPS which has a subsystem to handle training and how long it takes to improve various skills. And that subsystem in the same section where they talk about job income and cost of living.

Granted how Runequest, GURPS, and some other handles this is more straightforward, D&D's method is just more abstract. The fact is that training takes time, time cost money (or resources) in order to live.

Now I ditched Gold for XP in my D&D campaigns however if it came up that there was an opportunity for a PC to train, I would figure the cost and the benefits in the form of additional XP.

I'm not terribly familiar with Runequest or GURPS and was referring more to the way old D&D handles XP for Gold in particular. Though, I'm not huge on training for advancement, although I don't dismiss it entirely. But I think that the idea is widely overblown in RPGs and tends to come off as very "gamist" for lack of a better term in its approach. I prefer training as a gate for learning abilities or classes that are not broadly available to everyone in the game world and stuff like that, rather than as a stick for leveling up or regular progression.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 26, 2023, 12:10:48 PM

Quote from: estar on June 26, 2023, 11:15:40 AM

Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 26, 2023, 11:05:48 AM
Nothing wrong with different games but when it comes to D&D as designed there comes a point where you are no longer playing it.

Then what the objective test? Actual Play? I can say that all the players in my campaigns felt like they playing AD&D and having fun doing it.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 26, 2023, 11:05:48 AM
There are certain elements that make D&D what it is. Without defining elements there is no longer a unique identity.

As the OSR has demonstrated consistently for 15 years through numerous examples of actual play what is "D&D" even when limited to its classic editions is extraordinary far broader than what people give credit for.

That fact you really like the setting that is implied by Classic D&D RAW. Doesn't make games, like mine, that choose to run different settings with different assumptions any less D&D.

Is there any limit? Of course. There are many authors that try to leverage OSR as a form of branding or marketing for their  non-D&D efforts. Yet the core of the OSR centered on the classic edition keeps chugging along with a mix of authors and hobbyists that changes slowly across the decades.

Thematically, Lamentations of the Flame Princess is very different from the world painted by Gary Gygax in AD&D yet Raggi's works are still found useful for D&D campaigns by many hobbyists. As James Raggi still uses D&D mechanics extensively in his works.

Well as far as awarding XP for roleplay and player directed objectives these can be very different things. GURPS awards XP for how well you roleplay the character that was created lovingly point by point by the player. Success or failure depends on faithfully roleplaying the character. I like the GURPS system a great deal but that doesn't make it D&D no matter how much I enjoy it. I like both games for different reasons. Sometimes awarding XP for player directed goals being achieved and good roleplay come into conflict. Suppose the group's goal was accomplished and was a smashing success. Innocent villagers had to be slaughtered in the process but that was the price of victory. Should the LG paladin be awarded full points or should alignment be ditched too because its too rigid?  What if the player mission goal for the game month was to spend it drinking, gambling & whoring? How much XP would they get?

Anyone should change anything they wish to give the participants the gaming experience desired. Those changes may lead the game in different directions from D&D. For an excellent example pertinent to this discussion, check out the childrens story " Mexicali Soup". It has a very interesting lesson to teach.

Good RP and player directed objectives are just one tiny, often secondary facet of non-combat XP awards, usually taking second place to broader mission objectives and overcoming obstacles during play. And PC objectives and good RP coming into conflict is not exactly that common, and is often a factor of PCs getting involved in the right (or wrong) group to pursue their aims. If a traditional LG paladin is involved with a group that was somehow directly (as opposed to accidentally, or unable to prevent) involved in killing innocent villagers, something seriously wrong must have gone down either in that game session or the character's decision to hang out with that group.

Also, spending the month drinking, gambling & whoring aren't real mission goals, personal or otherwise, but rather pastimes. Non-combat XP usually awarded for actual accomplishments or personal sacrifices of some kind. Spending the time partying would normally net XP only if it involves good RP or the character accomplished something along the way. Maybe the PC managed to beat a well known gambler and earn some street cred during that time, or had to accomplish some task to convince a comely strumpet to spend the night with him, etc. But a player just declaring "I spent the month drinking, gambling & whoring" on it's own doesn't say much in terms of stuff that should probably be rewarded.

Quote from: VisionStorm on June 26, 2023, 02:42:39 PM
I'm not terribly familiar with Runequest or GURPS and was referring more to the way old D&D handles XP for Gold in particular. Though, I'm not huge on training for advancement, although I don't dismiss it entirely. But I think that the idea is widely overblown in RPGs and tends to come off as very "gamist" for lack of a better term in its approach. I prefer training as a gate for learning abilities or classes that are not broadly available to everyone in the game world and stuff like that, rather than as a stick for leveling up or regular progression.

You made a point about the "realism" of GOld for XP. There are several well-known example like college where you pay somebody to spend time to be trained on a subject and come out more experienced then you were before.

GURPS and Runequest rules on experience reflects some of this type of training. However you can abstract it further by saying OK you can spend X GP for Y experience. Just like not all combat mechanics don't detail out the specifics of every type of injury that the character could suffer.

Quote from: VisionStorm on June 26, 2023, 02:42:39 PM
I prefer training as a gate for learning abilities or classes that are not broadly available to everyone in the game world and stuff like that, rather than as a stick for leveling up or regular progression.

That a valid creative choice. And you are also right that some implementation of experience can feel more "gamey" than others. My view is that character can specifically train and thus earn XP. But they have to pay for a course of instruction/trainer and spend the time as the in-game way of doing this.

In case of Gold for XP even with the variant that you only get the XP if you spend the gold, I don't feel that it is unrealistic. I don't think it like how GURPS or Runequest handles it. The reason I dislike it has nothing to do with that. It more about that explictly tying XP gain to Gold won distracts players from enjoying the setting and having the adventures they want to have.

Quote from: VisionStorm on June 26, 2023, 02:42:39 PMBut a player just declaring "I spent the month drinking, gambling & whoring" on it's own doesn't say much in terms of stuff that should probably be rewarded.

I find this to be a trap as a referee. Many of ills I had to deal with referee stemmed from my view about what the players ought to be doing. For me "show probably be rewarded" is a giant red flag.

My alternative is to focus on roleplaying the NPCs. And making interesting situations and interesting NPCs. I find when I do that problem of what players "ought" to be doing sorts itself out.

Quote from: VisionStorm on June 26, 2023, 02:42:39 PMAlso, spending the month drinking, gambling & whoring aren't real mission goals, personal or otherwise, but rather pastimes.

Which leads to me asking "Why not?" it is a life lived filled with complications.

Quote from: VisionStorm on June 26, 2023, 02:42:39 PM
Non-combat XP usually awarded for actual accomplishments or personal sacrifices of some kind.

What is an accomplished is a judgment call. I learned to be flexible about accomplishment. Don't get me wrong there are times when I will gloss over a lengthy period of time. A players say while Bob is scribing spells for the next month, I am drinking and whoring. And both players clearly just want to gloss it over. Then I will have them both pay their costs, Bob gets his spells, and the first player will a roll to see if something interesting happen like rumors or contacts. They may get XP for the session but ajudicating that won't cover the entire session.

Quote from: VisionStorm on June 26, 2023, 02:42:39 PM
Spending the time partying would normally net XP only if it involves good RP or the character accomplished something along the way. Maybe the PC managed to beat a well known gambler and earn some street cred during that time, or had to accomplish some task to convince a comely strumpet to spend the night with him, etc. But a player just declaring "I spent the month drinking, gambling & whoring" on it's own doesn't say much in terms of stuff that should probably be rewarded.

In contrast if the player (or players) want to plant them in a tavern and drink their days away. Then I will certainly do something like the above.

I just wrapped up a City-State of the Invincible Overlord campaign, and a series of session in early part of the campaign involved the players just hanging out in the Tanglebones Tavern and doing stuff for the owner and the people who came in. Eventually they branched out to other parts of the setting and didn't visit the tavern as much. But after they got a bit of a rep after a mission.

The overall point is that RPGs are far more flexible then what most give them credit for.

Quote from: estar on June 26, 2023, 03:18:57 PM

Quote from: VisionStorm on June 26, 2023, 02:42:39 PM
I'm not terribly familiar with Runequest or GURPS and was referring more to the way old D&D handles XP for Gold in particular. Though, I'm not huge on training for advancement, although I don't dismiss it entirely. But I think that the idea is widely overblown in RPGs and tends to come off as very "gamist" for lack of a better term in its approach. I prefer training as a gate for learning abilities or classes that are not broadly available to everyone in the game world and stuff like that, rather than as a stick for leveling up or regular progression.

You made a point about the "realism" of GOld for XP. There are several well-known example like college where you pay somebody to spend time to be trained on a subject and come out more experienced then you were before.

GURPS and Runequest rules on experience reflects some of this type of training. However you can abstract it further by saying OK you can spend X GP for Y experience. Just like not all combat mechanics don't detail out the specifics of every type of injury that the character could suffer.

Quote from: VisionStorm on June 26, 2023, 02:42:39 PM
I prefer training as a gate for learning abilities or classes that are not broadly available to everyone in the game world and stuff like that, rather than as a stick for leveling up or regular progression.

That a valid creative choice. And you are also right that some implementation of experience can feel more "gamey" than others. My view is that character can specifically train and thus earn XP. But they have to pay for a course of instruction/trainer and spend the time as the in-game way of doing this.

In case of Gold for XP even with the variant that you only get the XP if you spend the gold, I don't feel that it is unrealistic. I don't think it like how GURPS or Runequest handles it. The reason I dislike it has nothing to do with that. It more about that explictly tying XP gain to Gold won distracts players from enjoying the setting and having the adventures they want to have.

Quote from: VisionStorm on June 26, 2023, 02:42:39 PMBut a player just declaring "I spent the month drinking, gambling & whoring" on it's own doesn't say much in terms of stuff that should probably be rewarded.

I find this to be a trap as a referee. Many of ills I had to deal with referee stemmed from my view about what the players ought to be doing. For me "show probably be rewarded" is a giant red flag.

My alternative is to focus on roleplaying the NPCs. And making interesting situations and interesting NPCs. I find when I do that problem of what players "ought" to be doing sorts itself out.

Quote from: VisionStorm on June 26, 2023, 02:42:39 PMAlso, spending the month drinking, gambling & whoring aren't real mission goals, personal or otherwise, but rather pastimes.

Which leads to me asking "Why not?" it is a life lived filled with complications.

Quote from: VisionStorm on June 26, 2023, 02:42:39 PM
Non-combat XP usually awarded for actual accomplishments or personal sacrifices of some kind.

What is an accomplished is a judgment call. I learned to be flexible about accomplishment. Don't get me wrong there are times when I will gloss over a lengthy period of time. A players say while Bob is scribing spells for the next month, I am drinking and whoring. And both players clearly just want to gloss it over. Then I will have them both pay their costs, Bob gets his spells, and the first player will a roll to see if something interesting happen like rumors or contacts. They may get XP for the session but ajudicating that won't cover the entire session.

Quote from: VisionStorm on June 26, 2023, 02:42:39 PM
Spending the time partying would normally net XP only if it involves good RP or the character accomplished something along the way. Maybe the PC managed to beat a well known gambler and earn some street cred during that time, or had to accomplish some task to convince a comely strumpet to spend the night with him, etc. But a player just declaring "I spent the month drinking, gambling & whoring" on it's own doesn't say much in terms of stuff that should probably be rewarded.

In contrast if the player (or players) want to plant them in a tavern and drink their days away. Then I will certainly do something like the above.

I just wrapped up a City-State of the Invincible Overlord campaign, and a series of session in early part of the campaign involved the players just hanging out in the Tanglebones Tavern and doing stuff for the owner and the people who came in. Eventually they branched out to other parts of the setting and didn't visit the tavern as much. But after they got a bit of a rep after a mission.

The overall point is that RPGs are far more flexible then what most give them credit for.

Yeah, I messed up my phrasing in some of that stuff, and perhaps came from a more "ought to" perspective than I should have (or "ought to" have ).

RE: Training: I already went through this at length in another thread, but I don't think that training always helps that much IRL, outside of learning new stuff. And even then you can technically learn on your own. But when it comes to getting better at stuff you already know, training can't beat on the ground experience most of the time (...in my experience ). And PCs will almost invariably get plenty of on the ground experience during play, specially combat related in most campaigns.

There might arguably be some specialized training programs that might help you get better if you already know stuff. But usually that's because they might teach you techniques you don't know that are new to you. And/or help you with your physical conditioning and such. Or (probably) they might involve some type of boot camp that's so intense it's almost like an adventure itself and worthy of it's own game session.

But I don't disagree with your take or your approach on it. And have tried similar stuff on the past. But XP/equivalent for training always felt a little iffy to me, cuz it incentivised characters sitting on downtime artificially getting better by throwing money at their skills without actually doing anything. It made me think "why not just skip a year or more and get a bunch of levels just cuz time went by?" And I tend to be skeptical of stuff that grants you XP/equivalent without getting stuff done in play or "earning" it through actual accomplishments.

Greetings!

I think training is very good, and entirely realistic. People that go off and do whatever "On their own" may have some natural talent, and they can learn some things from direct experience--but being professionally trained makes a WORLD OF DIFFERENCE.  Untrained people may be passable, or decent--but to be exceptional, to be truly excellent, to be the master of a Craft or discipline generally requires professional training. UNTRAINED PEOPLE die a whole lot more, and generally waste enormous amounts of energy, money, resources, or time--or all of these things--where being professionally trained reduces cost in resources and time, and maximizes learning, skill development, efficiency, diverse knowledge, and more. The principle o institutional professionalization has been developed and embraced for centuries, especially by large, civilized cultures, but even more primitive cultures embrace kinds of professionalization. Professions of everything are better than maverick wannabes.

Learning to be  soldier, sailor, hunter, scholar, a cook, a builder, crafter, or tradesman, everything.

Of course I use professional training for virtually everything in my Thandor World Campaigns. It makes good sense to do so, and not doing so just seems absurd.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

I am a HUGE believer in the silver standard, ever since I first read an article about it in Dragon magazine back in the 80's. I guess anything is possible in a fantasy world, but the idea that a sword or spear is worth more than its weight in gold (or thereabouts) never sat right with me.

I'm not at home as I write this so I don't have my house rule monetary table to publish here, but the SP is the base coin of all my campaigns, essentially replacing the GP so the latter can become more rare valuable. In my games, copper is the coin of the commoner, silver the specie for the tradesman and what 'middle class' there is, and gold is the realm of kings and emperors, dragon hoards, deep dwarven delves, etc. Gemstones are simply value-adjusted accordingly.

I also like to substitute expert / masterwork items for low level magic items, tp prevent magic items from becoming too prolific.

Although AD&D, 2E, are among my favorite systems, I have always had a problem with the treasure taken = XP mechanic of those games, and struggled to find a good substitute that wasn't too arbitrary. To date I have not satisfactorily resolved this. 

Quote from: jmarso on June 26, 2023, 06:14:11 PM
I am a HUGE believer in the silver standard, ever since I first read an article about it in Dragon magazine back in the 80's. I guess anything is possible in a fantasy world, but the idea that a sword or spear is worth more than its weight in gold (or thereabouts) never sat right with me.

I'm not at home as I write this so I don't have my house rule monetary table to publish here, but the SP is the base coin of all my campaigns, essentially replacing the GP so the latter can become more rare valuable. In my games, copper is the coin of the commoner, silver the specie for the tradesman and what 'middle class' there is, and gold is the realm of kings and emperors, dragon hoards, deep dwarven delves, etc. Gemstones are simply value-adjusted accordingly.

I also like to substitute expert / masterwork items for low level magic items, tp prevent magic items from becoming too prolific.

Although AD&D, 2E, are among my favorite systems, I have always had a problem with the treasure taken = XP mechanic of those games, and struggled to find a good substitute that wasn't too arbitrary. To date I have not satisfactorily resolved this.

In our own civilized world, it is absurd to think that something as mundane as a sword could be worth more than its weight in gold. In a fantasy realm where a good sword is not so common and there is danger everywhere, and gold is rather common due to so much of it being injected into the economy by adventurers, it is easy to imagine a good sword being worth more than its weight in gold. Value is relative to current conditions and available supply. Virtually nothing you may think of has a fixed intrinsic value regardless of circumstances or market. Bottled water is pretty cheap. Its available everywhere in plentiful supply. Lets change the circumstance to a remote cut off location after a terrible natural disaster, what then? A stash of bottled water skyrockets in value, at least until circumstance change once again. In the D&D realm we have the example of Dragonlance. Gold bricks are used as door stops. Steel pieces are the coin of the realm. Weapon grade steel is scare and thus more valuable than gold.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 26, 2023, 08:11:00 PM

Quote from: jmarso on June 26, 2023, 06:14:11 PM
I am a HUGE believer in the silver standard, ever since I first read an article about it in Dragon magazine back in the 80's. I guess anything is possible in a fantasy world, but the idea that a sword or spear is worth more than its weight in gold (or thereabouts) never sat right with me.

I'm not at home as I write this so I don't have my house rule monetary table to publish here, but the SP is the base coin of all my campaigns, essentially replacing the GP so the latter can become more rare valuable. In my games, copper is the coin of the commoner, silver the specie for the tradesman and what 'middle class' there is, and gold is the realm of kings and emperors, dragon hoards, deep dwarven delves, etc. Gemstones are simply value-adjusted accordingly.

I also like to substitute expert / masterwork items for low level magic items, tp prevent magic items from becoming too prolific.

Although AD&D, 2E, are among my favorite systems, I have always had a problem with the treasure taken = XP mechanic of those games, and struggled to find a good substitute that wasn't too arbitrary. To date I have not satisfactorily resolved this.

In our own civilized world, it is absurd to think that something as mundane as a sword could be worth more than its weight in gold. In a fantasy realm where a good sword is not so common and there is danger everywhere, and gold is rather common due to so much of it being injected into the economy by adventurers, it is easy to imagine a good sword being worth more than its weight in gold. Value is relative to current conditions and available supply. Virtually nothing you may think of has a fixed intrinsic value regardless of circumstances or market. Bottled water is pretty cheap. Its available everywhere in plentiful supply. Lets change the circumstance to a remote cut off location after a terrible natural disaster, what then? A stash of bottled water skyrockets in value, at least until circumstance change once again. In the D&D realm we have the example of Dragonlance. Gold bricks are used as door stops. Steel pieces are the coin of the realm. Weapon grade steel is scare and thus more valuable than gold.

So you're okay with DL making things even more absurd than baseline D&D, but not okay if we make things less absurd and closer to, say, medieval England?

(Also, a "good sword" is one thing, but what about a CLUB costing half a pound of gold? Does gold grow on trees in D&Dland? Wouldn't it be easier to produce clubs than to risk your life in a dungeon?)

Quote from: Eric Diaz on June 26, 2023, 08:23:00 PM

Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 26, 2023, 08:11:00 PM

Quote from: jmarso on June 26, 2023, 06:14:11 PM
I am a HUGE believer in the silver standard, ever since I first read an article about it in Dragon magazine back in the 80's. I guess anything is possible in a fantasy world, but the idea that a sword or spear is worth more than its weight in gold (or thereabouts) never sat right with me.

I'm not at home as I write this so I don't have my house rule monetary table to publish here, but the SP is the base coin of all my campaigns, essentially replacing the GP so the latter can become more rare valuable. In my games, copper is the coin of the commoner, silver the specie for the tradesman and what 'middle class' there is, and gold is the realm of kings and emperors, dragon hoards, deep dwarven delves, etc. Gemstones are simply value-adjusted accordingly.

I also like to substitute expert / masterwork items for low level magic items, tp prevent magic items from becoming too prolific.

Although AD&D, 2E, are among my favorite systems, I have always had a problem with the treasure taken = XP mechanic of those games, and struggled to find a good substitute that wasn't too arbitrary. To date I have not satisfactorily resolved this.

In our own civilized world, it is absurd to think that something as mundane as a sword could be worth more than its weight in gold. In a fantasy realm where a good sword is not so common and there is danger everywhere, and gold is rather common due to so much of it being injected into the economy by adventurers, it is easy to imagine a good sword being worth more than its weight in gold. Value is relative to current conditions and available supply. Virtually nothing you may think of has a fixed intrinsic value regardless of circumstances or market. Bottled water is pretty cheap. Its available everywhere in plentiful supply. Lets change the circumstance to a remote cut off location after a terrible natural disaster, what then? A stash of bottled water skyrockets in value, at least until circumstance change once again. In the D&D realm we have the example of Dragonlance. Gold bricks are used as door stops. Steel pieces are the coin of the realm. Weapon grade steel is scare and thus more valuable than gold.

So you're okay with DL making things even more absurd than baseline D&D, but not okay if we make things less absurd and closer to, say, medieval England?

(Also, a "good sword" is one thing, but what about a CLUB costing half a pound of gold? Does gold grow on trees in D&Dland? Wouldn't it be easier to produce clubs than to risk your life in a dungeon?)

A fucking Club costing half a pound of gold is fine because magic and dragons.

Don't get me worng, I play AD&D2e every week and I'm having a blast, I can overlook those issues. Doesn't mean that a game more close to a realistic Medieval (wherever) is bad, and fixing D&D to accomplish that isn't either bad nor impossible, you might find you need to change other things downstream but haven't we ALWAYS houseruled the shit out of the game?

I don't remember right now but Lion & Dragon might have some stuff worth looking at in that regard.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on June 26, 2023, 08:32:41 PM

Quote from: Eric Diaz on June 26, 2023, 08:23:00 PM

Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 26, 2023, 08:11:00 PM

Quote from: jmarso on June 26, 2023, 06:14:11 PM
I am a HUGE believer in the silver standard, ever since I first read an article about it in Dragon magazine back in the 80's. I guess anything is possible in a fantasy world, but the idea that a sword or spear is worth more than its weight in gold (or thereabouts) never sat right with me.

I'm not at home as I write this so I don't have my house rule monetary table to publish here, but the SP is the base coin of all my campaigns, essentially replacing the GP so the latter can become more rare valuable. In my games, copper is the coin of the commoner, silver the specie for the tradesman and what 'middle class' there is, and gold is the realm of kings and emperors, dragon hoards, deep dwarven delves, etc. Gemstones are simply value-adjusted accordingly.

I also like to substitute expert / masterwork items for low level magic items, tp prevent magic items from becoming too prolific.

Although AD&D, 2E, are among my favorite systems, I have always had a problem with the treasure taken = XP mechanic of those games, and struggled to find a good substitute that wasn't too arbitrary. To date I have not satisfactorily resolved this.

In our own civilized world, it is absurd to think that something as mundane as a sword could be worth more than its weight in gold. In a fantasy realm where a good sword is not so common and there is danger everywhere, and gold is rather common due to so much of it being injected into the economy by adventurers, it is easy to imagine a good sword being worth more than its weight in gold. Value is relative to current conditions and available supply. Virtually nothing you may think of has a fixed intrinsic value regardless of circumstances or market. Bottled water is pretty cheap. Its available everywhere in plentiful supply. Lets change the circumstance to a remote cut off location after a terrible natural disaster, what then? A stash of bottled water skyrockets in value, at least until circumstance change once again. In the D&D realm we have the example of Dragonlance. Gold bricks are used as door stops. Steel pieces are the coin of the realm. Weapon grade steel is scare and thus more valuable than gold.

So you're okay with DL making things even more absurd than baseline D&D, but not okay if we make things less absurd and closer to, say, medieval England?

(Also, a "good sword" is one thing, but what about a CLUB costing half a pound of gold? Does gold grow on trees in D&Dland? Wouldn't it be easier to produce clubs than to risk your life in a dungeon?)

A fucking Club costing half a pound of gold is fine because magic and dragons.

Don't get me worng, I play AD&D2e every week and I'm having a blast, I can overlook those issues. Doesn't mean that a game more close to a realistic Medieval (wherever) is bad, and fixing D&D to accomplish that isn't either bad nor impossible, you might find you need to change other things downstream but haven't we ALWAYS houseruled the shit out of the game?

I don't remember right now but Lion & Dragon might have some stuff worth looking at in that regard.

Yeah, I was fine just overlooking these issues, but now that I've seen it apparently I am unable to unsee it... Fortunately we can just houserule that out indeed! Might take a look at L&D...