Your Game & XP

[Exalt]

I chose, By the book (Without treasure XP).

I like a slower pace, when I CK.

Option 2 suits my play-style fine.

Ex
_________________
Creating Teratophobia among players for over two decades.

[James M. Ward]

I'm always proud to say that Gary Gygax taught me all I know about gaming. He would award points for treasure, monsters, and good role-playing. We never went up like rockets in levels. I played in his game for 15 or so years and my best character was a 14th level wizard.

James M. Ward

[DangerDwarf]

James M. Ward wrote:
I played in his game for 15 or so years and my best character was a 14th level wizard.

On a related note, this was something I was thinking abut recently in regard to the change sin gaming over the years.

When I was younger, most of our campaigns spanned the course of several years of pretty regular play.

However, it seems in modern times that sort of play doesn't happen as much. Not so much through lack of interest but almost like a side effect of our "fast paced" modern world. Folks move around with their jobs and countless other things that seem to make a campaign lasting even five years a rarity.

So, because of that it looks like faster progression has grown to be the norm so that people could still make it to upper levels in our "Go! Go! Go!" world.

Seems that way at least.

[Kayolan]

depends on what kind of game it's going to be

With a slow, drawn out campaign, where the pcs go back and forth from dungeon to town, and slowly explore outward from their base of operations, I use a strict 1 xp per gp of treasure value gained. I also add in any xp from magic items that are kept, if magic items are sold, then they are awarded xps equal to the gold value recieved. Of course, training time would be required (up to 9th level), as well as cost of living, eventual (possible) construction costs for building strongholds, employing hirelings, etc. would mean that I keep the treasure frequency high. There would be little need for xp awards for goals attained or good rping.

If I run a fast, episodic campaign, where the pcs are moving from place to place, with little action inbetween encounters (maybe they are always in a race against time), then I skip the training rules, award xp for treasure as usuall (though perhaps a bit less or a bit more depending on the circumstances) and award a much higher amount of xp for role playing well and attaining goals, since high amounts of treasure will not be as necessary; construction of strongholds and gathering of armies will not likely happen.

Sometimes I'll switch modes during a single campaign, usually after the pcs are past 9th level, and no longer require training time, but do not wish to clear territory and establish dominion. Xps for killing monsters or subduing them in some fashion would be awarded as per the rules in either case.

[Lord Dynel]

DangerDwarf wrote:
On a related note, this was something I was thinking abut recently in regard to the change sin gaming over the years.

When I was younger, most of our campaigns spanned the course of several years of pretty regular play.

However, it seems in modern times that sort of play doesn't happen as much. Not so much through lack of interest but almost like a side effect of our "fast paced" modern world. Folks move around with their jobs and countless other things that seem to make a campaign lasting even five years a rarity.

So, because of that it looks like faster progression has grown to be the norm so that people could still make it to upper levels in our "Go! Go! Go!" world.

Seems that way at least.

Man, this side topic can easily be a whole 'nother thread topic.
No, you're right DD. I fondly remember campaigns of my youth, and I haven't been in rpgs for a really long time (since '86). But I remember having a ton of time to play - after school, during summers, the whole bit. I could easily afford campaigns that would span years.

I'm still impresses that I had a campaign in the 3.x era span years. I started one in 2001 (it was my second on in the 3.x era - the first one kind of fizzled due to scheduling conflicts) and it laster all teh way until my wife had out second child, in early 2005. Yeah, I know...not epic, but still the longest one I've had in quite some time.
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

[cinderblock]

Our Group has had two really signifigant length campaigns lately. A year long Savage Worlds game set in 50 fathoms and a year long 3.5 Age of Worms campaign for 3.5. Now we are hoping to turn CZ into our big campaign for the future. One of my groups has been at it since last September and my other group since January. I've been going BTB for xp in both games and its been great fun. Group 1 finally has a third level rogue (the only character to start the campaign who hasn't either been killed or severly maimed and forced to retire) and Group 2, after a rather horrible TPK at the Dark Chateau, finally has a 2nd level character. So far no one has complained about the progression in fact its been just the opposite. It reminds me of my first games when my current players start talking excitedly about how cool it'll be when their characters finally hit second level.

[Sundog]

I tend to use by the book, but only award for treasure when getting hands on the treasure itself was an obstacle to overcome in some way.

I also always liked the experience system used in the Alternity RPG, and have wondered in idle moments whether it would work OK in C&C. Just have to try it one day.