Total Eclipse RPG

[Prak]

You are advocating rewarding your paste eater on the team with the same XP that the rest got. This game recognizes that good play, better rewards. Also remember, XP for good rolls is only 1 way to get XP.

So what?

Players who roll well more often still get more XP than those who roll poorly, all else being equal.

Is this something you consider acceptable? If so, why? If not, what does your system do to prevent it?

I'm still a bit unclear on how the rolling of the die works; however, even if a player receives XP due to a better roll...I think this makes for a more exciting game. Many--if not most--games have a luck-factor, which adds suspense. The players still wouldn't necessarily be equal because as dk stated, there are other ways to receive XP.

Now factor in luck discrepancies. Or even loaded dice. One player is getting xp 3/5 times they roll because they're lucky, another is getting xp 1/12 times they roll because they're unlucky. Without being able to see the other ways I could gain xp to try and keep up with Mr. I'd-swear-his-dice-were-loaded-if-I-didn't-know-him-so-well, I ain't putting up even $2 for this game.

[Fuchs]

If I want to compete with other players I don't play an RPG. There are lots of games better suited for that.

[sabs]

I find that individual xp rewards is shitty. It creates an imbalance that is almost always not fun.

Someone levels slower than the others, or someone levels way faster. I play rpgs to have fun, not to measure my dick with my friends. When I run, I figure out the total exp rewards for the entire group (including good rp rewards, etc) and I divide evenly by everyone in the group.

I've played in games where the DM handed out individual exp, and everyone received different exp.. and it sucks. Mostly because it feels incredibly arbitrary.. it's a populatiry contest with the GM. Who said something the gm found funny, who does the gm prefer.

If you have a paste easter in your group.. he's there for a reason. If you think his fantasy character should be inferior to yours.. maybe you need to figure out why you play with this guy in the first place.

[Lich-Loved]

Off topic but this gets to a fundamental question I have been wrestling with: why have XP-per-action at all? By action, I mean killing or otherwise defeating a monster, making a check of some kind, swinging well with a weapon or whatever. In the past few years in 3E, Pathfinder and SW, I have moved to granting XP for story awards only, with the conditions for "successful completion" well known and clearly delineated as possible at the outset of an adventure. This has driven characters into avoiding combats when they can (unless they feel the risk is worth the monetary reward less the expenditure of resources), allowing something other than "kill or die trying" combats, and leading to solutions that do not always involve violence against the BBEG.

Is there any reason a game should have fine-grained experience?

[Username17]

Is there any reason a game should have fine-grained experience?

XP can be used as a Scooby Snack to keep people engaging in the game. What you really don't want is for people to lose interest in the proceedings, because they probably aren't going to do anything once they get to that point.


Basically, you want people to be incentivized to pay attention and take actions. Because the alternative is that people stop paying attention, stop interacting with the story, and both stop having fun and stop making fun.

That being said, I think there are better ways to achieve that goal. The first step to incentivizing people to take actions is to stop being a Gygaxian fuckwad who punishes players for taking actions. If you slap the players down when they offer suggestions or attempt to have their characters do things, of course they are going to be less engaged. But even beyond that, White Wolf of all people found a pretty good way to incentivize player involvement by having character resource pools refresh with in-character actions. You don't have to provide permanent character growth incentives for transient player involvement. And indeed, you don't want to, because paradoxically the uninvolved players are going to get discouraged if the more involved players start pulling ahead on the growth curve.

Individual player XP rewards aren't a completely stupid idea. It's just that people had pretty well figured out how to do that better in like 1991.

-Username17