My reasons to clear the dungeon out completely had everything to do with the little merchant inside wondering if I could sell enough everburning lamps to pay for those new shoes of water walking before the big ocean voyage.
|
Call of Cthulhu is a (simple) skill based system, not a level based one.There was a d20 version of Call of Cthulhu by Monte Cook. It was a class based system with only two classes to choose from...
There's a reason that that game died out after minimal support. d20 is NOT always the best answer.
And was there a remotely semi-popular game in the aughts that didn't have a cheap d20 cash-in edition? Mostly done by Monte Cook.
|
|
Huh, never really thought about habits formed from other media. I always thought exploring dungeons fully was just a wise precaution against surprises. I guess it depends on the group, as some might reason it to be getting that 100% Clear achievement. :)
I think it also depends on the dungeon. There's no reason not co clear out the 5-room dungeon. On the other hand, trying to clear out Rappan Athuk, Castle Whiterock, Castle Greyhawk, etc. isn't just an exercise in futility, it's also suicidal.
|
There's a reason that that game died out after minimal support. d20 is NOT always the best answer.
I didn't say that it was, I was just letting thejeff know that there was indeed a level based version of the game.
And for the record, I prefer the original skill-based version. In fact, I run a campaign using the 6th Edition rules...
So, my 2 cp here:
Aren't XPs core to the system? PF and 3.x anyway.
If you bail on using XPs formally then you'll need to proxy them anyhow.
Is it Core? If you take out the XP is does very little to alter the game mechanically. Psychologically it might alter the players perception or feelings about the game. But this can vary from player to player.
When we played Rise of the Runelords we just looked at the recommended level for each module (printed therein) and poof/presto that is when we got our level. Had we added up exp as we went along we most likely would have gained our level at around the same time.
When playing a module that has magic shops and a difficulty that requires a certain degree of optimizing having exp granted this way felt ok for our table. When playing other systems or non modules we reverted back to a more detailed book keeping style.
-MD
What if you just level them at the start of the new mod? Is that XP being proxied?Yes, yes it is! Just what the group Muad'Dib described above did for the RotR AP.
Though proxying XP in that way would make bean-counting players blanch. :)
I would suggest something a little weird here: the opposite is what is true.
What is XP?
At it's fundamental basics, it's a method of tracking when characters level up.
Levels are a determiner (roughly) of the power a given character has (and what kind of challenges they can take on).
In this regard, I'd say that XP are not the important thing: levels are.
Thus, tracking XP is less important than tracking levels.
"When" to level is not, then, a proxy for XP: XP are a proxy for telling you when to level. It is one method among many, and, though it is the default method utilized by Pathfinder and Paizo products in general, this is because 1) "GM Fiat" is really hard to codify in any reasonable or fair manner for a generic rules system, 2) the legacy of the game (abstracting leveling up by XP has been around for a looooooong time), and 3) it allows for an easy-to-point-to metric that can vary between groups, and allows starting GMs easier balancing than not (by way of having a solid baseline metric from which to vary as opposed to "here's fiat, now figure it out yourself", which tends to cause problems).
I fall into the no XP camp as well. We'll level when the group feels like it (I'm the type to level the PCs very very slowly or never level them at all, but I doubt most players like that, so levelling will have to be something the PCs have a hand in deciding. Like, they come up to me and say it's been 20 or 35 encounters or something and think it's about time to gain a level, and I let them, but if it's been 10 I say it's a bit too early.). I don't want to do the bookkeeping involved in actually using XPs, and I'm really apathetic towards handing out level gains, so it's probably best to let the players decide as long as they aren't being ridiculous and trying to level up every 10 encounters.
So, my 2 cp here:
Aren't XPs core to the system? PF and 3.x anyway.
If you bail on using XPs formally then you'll need to proxy them anyhow.
Is it Core? If you take out the XP is does very little to alter the game mechanically. Psychologically it might alter the players perception or feelings about the game. But this can vary from player to player.
When we played Rise of the Runelords we just looked at the recommended level for each module (printed therein) and poof/presto that is when we got our level. Had we added up exp as we went along we most likely would have gained our level at around the same time.
When playing a module that has magic shops and a difficulty that requires a certain degree of optimizing having exp granted this way felt ok for our table. When playing other systems or non modules we reverted back to a more detailed book keeping style.
-MD
Once more into the breech! :D
Yes, XPs are core to Class-based systems. At least all the one's I'm familiar with. Certainly 3.PF and their d20 clones and variants.
For example:
Let's say keeping track of every single XP is too tedious for your group so you round to the nearest 1,000 XP. Doing that isn't RAW but it works just fine - particularly at higher levels it really makes no difference.Or like you describe with the APs:
As the campaign progresses, at the right time, simply round to the nearest PC Class Level. If you do that you are using Class Level as a proxy for XPs entirely.Either way, and not to exclude other ways as well, XPs are being proxied somehow. They have to be.
Your first assumption is incorrect.
1) classed based does not mean level based. Some games have classes/roles that determine your skill sets, but do not have levels.
2) XP is only one method of tracking advancement in a level based system. Just because it is the dominant method does not mean that other methods are simulating XP.
Ex: I can walk to your house or I can bike to your house. Walking is not a proxy for biking, it is a different mode of achieving the same goal.
A proxy of the XP system would be an alternate method of awarding XP, such as using GM fiat instead of the CR system, or just giving players flat rewards per encounter regardless of difficulty. Those would be proxies of the XP system. Other methods that don't involve XP and never deal with the number have nothing to do with XP and are independent methods all-together.
Consider it like this, experience is a unit of measurement to track progress towards leveling. Other methods are different units of measurement.
Miles are no proxies of kilometers, they're just different types of units. They measure the same thing, but are irrelevant to each other for their own purposes (excluding conversion).
The thing being tracked is levels. It is possible to measure the level of a character while being completely unaware of what their experience total is. Therefore alternate methods have nothing to do with experience, since it is an irrelevant term when not being actively used.
Feng Shui comes to mind. They don't call them "classes", they're archetypes. Theoretically it's a skill based game, but you don't get to pick your skills. You pick your archetype and that determines your skills. If a skill isn't a specialty of your archetype it is limited in how much it can grow. It's not called "classes", but the concept is the same mechanically. Your character type determines your abilities.
I've played a few others, but my memory fails me at the moment.
They still aren't XP-proxies. The concept of XP isn't being replaced, it's being discarded.
a figure that can be used to represent the value of something in a calculation
If instead of calling it XP I called them quibbits, that would be a proxy. The same calculations are still being done, but instead of XP, we'd be accumulating quibbits, and when players had enough quibbits they'd level up.
That process is being discarded entirely in non-XP methods of advancement.
Example: In 13th Age, the standard advancement model goes like this...
After 4 encounters the party gains a long rest. Each long rest, the characters receive 1 partial advancement (they gain one portion of benefits from their next level). On the 4th long rest, the characters take the full level, gaining the remaining benefits not yet taken.
In this, each encounter is worth 1/16 of the XP needed to level. That could be considered a proxy. This is essentially the result of the math from most XP systems as well (though I think medium advancement averages closer to 12-13 encounters per level in PF and most 3.X systems).
If someone is using a story milestone method, XP isn't being tracked, nor is anything similar to it. It's an entirely different way of leveling that discards the concept of XP.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If someone is using a story milestone method, XP isn't being tracked, nor is anything similar to it. It's an entirely different way of leveling that discards the concept of XP.Yeah, Feng Shui is a class system. Uses different jargon but it's still a class template.
Proxy - see item 2) in my previous post. :)
Story Milestones are a way of tracking XP. The point totals are just rolled into a small set of rational numbers. Instead of tracking individual XPs, a bin of XP is tracked and they call it a Milestone. When enough bins are stacked together the PC gains a level in her class.
Proxy can work both ways.
You could call 3.PF XPs "Milestones" if you wanted to. PCs start out having zero "Milestones" and as they adventure they pass more of them, sometimes quickly, sometimes slowly. When the PCs have 1,000+ "Milestones" they have crossed over into 2nd Level status.
But, since XPs came first, it makes more sense to speak of Milestones as proxies for XPs.
1) You asked for an example of a game that uses classes, but not levels. I provided it.
2) You just parroted an example from my post back at me.
You have successfully convinced me that you failed to comprehend the words I wrote.
|
XP is perfectly fine as tracker of progression between levels.
It works for games that don't want X encounters or "right time" to level games where that wouldn't work or be the best fit.
It can serve as a way to:
- Track progress on a micro level (vs. Macro or level).
- Can serve as a better reward system where a smaller reward would make sense than a full level
- Can serve (this will cause some seizures) a smaller penalty system than taking away full levels.
- Works better for non-linear campaigns or adventures with no "it feels about right" spot to level everyone up moments.
- Works in a system where xp is also a form of character currency for buying class abilities, edges, training or development beyond mere levels.
As I said before, Xp-less systems work well for established AP since they have a level expectation built into different sections.
For open campaigns with individual character goals and game environment (and rates of growth) an xp tracking system does the job better. I have yet to see anything posted here to convince me otherwise.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thank God we have the internet so we can hash these kinds of things out.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Somebody is wrong on the internet!!!