A problem with Levels.

[SangoProduction]

And XP in general. Just something I noticed in a game I ran the time before last.

The problem being that it disincentivizes roleplaying, if you want to level up. Since, unless you are gaining intel on your mission, you are spending time that could be spent fighting things to get gameplay rewards. That is, unless you kinda break the world in that just talking with NPCs grants any kind of substantial XP...in which case, why aren't all the townsfolk level 20+?

Even using a "checkpoint" system, where you level up, no XP involved, when you complete objectives, then it's still the case. Sure, you could enjoy the roleplaying, but the more IRL time you take doing that, the longer you wait before completing the objective, and thus, the level up.

I eventually just said to my players "Well, screw it. You guys are the special group, the "destined ones." The townsfolk aren't getting this much XP from talking because a wizard done it. Now move on."

And adopting that position from the outset on my next game made a noticeable difference. Might have just been that the new group was...I dunno...different people, but still, even with my current group, there was less of a feeling to hurry along after stating that.

[martixy]

I was lucky to start my tabletop career without XP. :)

Then when I actually participated into a game which used it, I swiftly understood why my earlier gaming buddies had summarily dispensed with its use.

It incentivizes all the wrong, murder-hoboey tendencies, especially given inexperienced DMs who cannot offer a compelling alternative.

The thing is, when you leave XP behind for long enough, the fact that there is no longer any XP completely loses its novelty and stops being a concept and influencer in the minds of the players one way or the other.

The negative of this is that you are cutting out a very interesting additional economic system from the game.
But that's part of the process. Game design is an exercise in compromise. In this case, IMO, the benefits far outweigh the negatives.

[pupaeted]

From groups I've played with I'd say that people do like roleplaying. They really like it. I'm not sure the fear of players just slaughtering everything for xp is justified, not where they get good opportunities to play their character. I normally just see XP as a reward for getting through a situation where they could have died, basically a bribe to get them to forgive their sadistic DM for raking them across the coals.

If this is a real problem you're seeing in real games, there are alternative systems like milestone levelling and encounter XP (where you get a creature's XP no matter how you bypass it). DMG p.40 has some advice for giving XP for non-combat encounters, and for explicitly awarding it for good roleplaying.

[Yuki Akuma]

This is the reason games like GURPS and Chronicles of Darkness just give you XP at the end of the session - and more, if you roleplayed well or achieved important objectives. I'm sure you could adapt that system somehow for D&D.

Like, (Level * 100) xp per session, then an extra chunk if the group did some impressive roleplaying and an extra chunk if they achieved some important objective?

And maybe an extra-large chunk at the end of a quest.

[johnbragg]

I did two things in my last 3X campaign about XP and levelling.

1. I handwaved tracking XP closely. There were Average encounters (x1), HArd encounters (x2) and Easy encounters (x0.5). 10 Average encounters moves you up a level.

2. Rule-of-thumb on whether a borderline encounter was Easy, Average or HArd? How badass do you sound telling the story to regular townspeople. The PCs spend some time relaxing in the tavern of the hamlet that has adopted them as local heroes. Well, when they're 1st level, the first 2-3 times the PCs tell about how they killed a couple of goblins yesterday, it's pretty impressive. But when they hit 2nd level, the story of killing another couple of goblins doesn't have the same impact.

I'd apply the same standard to non-combat encounters. Oh, first of all, remember that non-routine roleplaying conversations ARE encounters. The first time you talk to the head of the City Guard should be at least an Easy encounter. The PCs could screw up and make an enemy, or not get the information they need, etc. After you've talked to the Guard captain a few times, it's not as stressful, so you roleplay what you need to roleplay to move on to the story.

If the PCs are trying to accomplish something while roleplaying, it's at least an Easy encounter. Does the Bard wheedle important information out of the Duke's daughter during the dance? That's an encounter. Does the 5th level Bard seduce the nameless commoner barmaid? That's a trivial encounter, like the 5th level fighter dispatching the single orc in the forest. You could roleplay that if you really want to, just like you COULD roll-play the execution of the hapless orc, but I'd handwave both of them.

Why aren't the townspeople levelling up based on all their conversations with each other? Well, sometimes they are. Some of those conversations are important enough to rate as Easy encounters--it's not a matter of life and death, but it's important. Rack up 20 of those, and you're a 2nd level warrior or expert, in my campaigns. (Commoners retrain to a better NPC class halfway through 1st level, in the background of my campaigns).

[Kelb_Panthera]

I don't quite understand the problem.

How is roleplay harmed by the adventurers being driven to complete great deeds? Because they don't piddle-fart around in town talking about small nothings? Because they don't ask ye olde shoppe keep "how's the wife and kids" and other mundane stuff like that?

If so, why do you -want- to waste time on that sort of thing? Unless you're running a political campaign (for which D20 isn't necessarily the best system) it's kind of expected that men of action want to be -doing- something to make a name/ fortune for themselves.

If the players aren't putting any investment in talking to your NPC's, the blame doesn't lie with XP as a concept, it lies with you for not making them interesting enough to be worth investing mental effort into them.

Besides, you realize this totally kills self-improvement (in the sense of improving in skill) as a believable motivation, right? If no amount of effort actually makes any gains until the DM says so, how do you actually stick to that motivation? The itinerant warrior concept is badly hurt by this, though not quite killed outright, since you now basically -have- to use the lack of viable alternatives motivation for why you're wandering around.

Like I said, I just don't get where you're coming from at all here.

[OldTrees1]

And XP in general. Just something I noticed in a game I ran the time before last.

The problem being that it disincentivizes roleplaying, if you want to level up. Since, unless you are gaining intel on your mission, you are spending time that could be spent fighting things to get gameplay rewards. That is, unless you kinda break the world in that just talking with NPCs grants any kind of substantial XP...in which case, why aren't all the townsfolk level 20+?

1) Things other than fighting do grant xp.
2) Doing the same xp granting task is a very slow way to get to medium level. Some systems even make the xp granted vanish to 0 as you increase in level.
3) Not everyone cares about getting stronger and those that still do still have other motives.

To get stronger the Farmer has to attempt something challenging, but attempting something challenging increases the risk to their family. So rather than try for that DC 30 check, they will take 10 and use their consistent DC 15 farming procedure. It produces enough that they can rely on a sufficient harvest to get by, raise children, and have some luxuries.
Sure I want my character to get stronger, but I also am playing my character. My character has their own wishes and desires that I desire to see them act upon.

4) How is it that RP is not considered a gameplay reward or something that gives gameplay rewards? When my necromancer is talking about the logistics of setting up their offscreen college, that is a reward to both the necromancer & me. Any successes in those talks are also rewarding to both the necromancer & me.

[SangoProduction]

From groups I've played with I'd say that people do like roleplaying. They really like it. I'm not sure the fear of players just slaughtering everything for xp is justified, not where they get good opportunities to play their character. I normally just see XP as a reward for getting through a situation where they could have died, basically a bribe to get them to forgive their sadistic DM for raking them across the coals.

If this is a real problem you're seeing in real games, there are alternative systems like milestone levelling and encounter XP (where you get a creature's XP no matter how you bypass it). DMG p.40 has some advice for giving XP for non-combat encounters, and for explicitly awarding it for good roleplaying.

I don't fear murder hoboing. If that's what they enjoy, go for it. But by having the systems in place that incentivize you doing perhaps the less enjoyable part of a Role Playing Game, over the more enjoyable, you do lose something.

[jk7275]

Why mot reward bonus xp for roleplaying or creative thinking? Maybe try solving a murder or steal something back where they want to avoid bloodshed
Look at dungeon magazine for some ideas

[SangoProduction]

I don't quite understand the problem.

How is roleplay harmed by the adventurers being driven to complete great deeds? Because they don't piddle-fart around in town talking about small nothings? Because they don't ask ye olde shoppe keep "how's the wife and kids" and other mundane stuff like that?

If so, why do you -want- to waste time on that sort of thing? Unless you're running a political campaign (for which D20 isn't necessarily the best system) it's kind of expected that men of action want to be -doing- something to make a name/ fortune for themselves.

If the players aren't putting any investment in talking to your NPC's, the blame doesn't lie with XP as a concept, it lies with you for not making them interesting enough to be worth investing mental effort into them.

Besides, you realize this totally kills self-improvement (in the sense of improving in skill) as a believable motivation, right? If no amount of effort actually makes any gains until the DM says so, how do you actually stick to that motivation? The itinerant warrior concept is badly hurt by this, though not quite killed outright, since you now basically -have- to use the lack of viable alternatives motivation for why you're wandering around.

Like I said, I just don't get where you're coming from at all here.

I perhaps misrepresented the problem. Not that they didn't want to "piddle-fart", but that they did, but noticed the slowing of XP, and I noticed them wanting to get to the fight, not for the fight itself, but the XP and such to progress their characters. The group enjoyed the roleplaying, but it was doing nothing for the characters.

[Long_shanks]

I've mostly played with two groups in my tabletop career, and none of those used the XP system. Every few sessions, at the GM's discretion, we gained a level. Plain and simple. I've played in one campain (or let's say I've okayed four or five session) with DM that calculated every single point of XP we gained, based on the damage we did to enemies, with no rewards for good roleplaying or for finding a non-violent solution to problems. Let's just say I got out of there pretty fast.
I've just started a GMing a Pathfinder game and I still don't give XP. If a player does something really impressive, there could be some rewards in game, but never bonus XP. All our players are always at the same level.

[SangoProduction]

Why not reward bonus xp for roleplaying or creative thinking? Maybe try solving a murder or steal something back where they want to avoid bloodshed
Look at dungeon magazine for some ideas

I was initially (although I didn't clearly state that...didn't know where to put it), as well as a "per session" XP, although the question of "if xp works through talking with people..." as seen in the op, came up. I eventually, just ended up going with the explicit explanation "because reasons."

[Kelb_Panthera]

I perhaps misrepresented the problem. Not that they didn't want to "piddle-fart", but that they did, but noticed the slowing of XP, and I noticed them wanting to get to the fight, not for the fight itself, but the XP and such to progress their characters. The group enjoyed the roleplaying, but it was doing nothing for the characters.

Then why are you not handing out XP for non-combat encounters? That's a basic convention of the game right out of the DMG. XP is awarded for overcoming challenges of all types, not just kicking monster butt.

Gods this particular error is aggravating. It wouldn't be so bad if it was less common or if people didn't complain so much -after- getting it wrong. :smallannoyed:

[rrwoods]

Yeah if you're only awarding XP for killing stuff then of course that's where the incentive lies. So... don't?

My current DM awards XP mostly ad hoc, but it's definitely based on how we handle all three pillars of adventuring (combat, social, exploration).

[Grod_The_Giant]

I perhaps misrepresented the problem. Not that they didn't want to "piddle-fart", but that they did, but noticed the slowing of XP, and I noticed them wanting to get to the fight, not for the fight itself, but the XP and such to progress their characters. The group enjoyed the roleplaying, but it was doing nothing for the characters.
So... they... were meandering around, noticed they weren't getting much experience, and then wanted to go on with the plot? That... seems right. Meandering around shouldn't give you wads of experience; you're not doing anything to advance... anything, really-- yourself, the plot, what have you.

[Gryphonfg]

A few thoughts I have as both a player and DM. First, as a player, most of my favorite game sessions in the past have been role playing, not combat related. But, that could just be my personal preference. Yes, killing Demogorgon was a great accomplishment, but it was more fun getting the druid drunk, abandoning him on the doorstep of a NPC's place, and then trying to seduce the half elf cleric in the party.

As a DM, I'm not too keen on murder hoboing. I understand that combat is a major part of the game, but it's not the only part. I try to include both role playing encounters (which I award xp for) and skill challenges (which also earn xp). And to encourage good role playing, at the end of a session, I have the party vote for who was the best role player that day and give them a little bonus.

In the current campaign that I'm running, we went almost 2 full sessions without combat. It was all role playing and skill challenges as the party tracked down an assassin. At the end of the second session, they found the assassin's lair and killed him and his minions.

[Alcore]

I'll start from the top; I think you misrepresented your problem (you even said so recently) and I am not going to talk about that (that would only leave me repeating others). Instead I will talk about the many ways to earn XP.


Combat (encounters) - for some the end all be all. That's fine. Smiting your enemies and driving them before you is fun. Though... I would like to point out that killing is not necessary. Those bandits you into submission? It might be just as rewarding to tie them up and turn them to the local authorities; it would even earn brownie points with the city guard knowing your respecting the laws of the land....


Exploring - believe it or not in Pathfinder you can earn 100xp for exploring a hex. Not walking through but spending time and energy learning the lay of the land. I find this a nice change but is little noticed being so far removed from the core rule book.


Knowledge rolls - some of the more recent Adventure Paths in pathfinder feature xp totals on knowledge rolls. The amount varies based on level and DC but a level 1 wizard would earning a lot of crafting xp in a short time. If he shares the knowledge? Yay! The party gains xp.


Encounters themselves - tribe of orcs harassing the kingdom but you can't have them removed? Diplomacy is the answer. The elf bard brings some females to instigate an orgy to barter for peace? I'm willing to grant xp for that. Come to a fork in the road with only left and right and the party goes straight.... up a 50 foot wall of rock to bypass my other encounters? Sure, it's a long way down for you low levels, definite xp to be earned there.

The ways and penalties for failure allows xp to be made. Commoners typically don't do much, if anything, risky.

[legomaster00156]

My groups use the so-called checkpoint system, where levels are gained at appropriate moments. However, I also have a very, very, very RP-heavy group of friends who will roleplay for days and days before trying to advance the story through combat or anything. Yes, this leads to slower levels. We don't mind. :smallwink:

[Shawn Yasumara]

Our DM follows the usual rules for XP, but grants it as a total at the end of a given session. He also adds bonus XP for roleplaying, exploring, or creative thinking. To incentivize roleplaying, he also borrows the Inspiration from 5e - represented as a giant foam d20 he hands to whoever he thinks is doing particularly well. It's been thrown at walls during panic saving throws a couple times. It's great stuff.

[Darth Ultron]

The group enjoyed the roleplaying, but it was doing nothing for the characters.

It's true role playing does noting for the characters. But it does wonders for the players. That is who role playing is for.

D&D 3x/Pathfinder is bad enough as they overly encourage optimizers that don't role play, but if you want it too, you can reduce the game down to Dungeon! (the board game) or video game level.

Player-''I move my character into area 5''
DM-" You see an orc''
Player-"I attack''

[SangoProduction]

It's true role playing does noting for the characters. But it does wonders for the players. That is who role playing is for.

D&D 3x/Pathfinder is bad enough as they overly encourage optimizers that don't role play, but if you want it too, you can reduce the game down to Dungeon! (the board game) or video game level.

Player-''I move my character into area 5''
DM-" You see an orc''
Player-"I attack''

Ooo. Nice and spicey. Really adds to a conversation.

[icefractal]

I haven't found this to be a problem. It's more RL time spent at the same level, but it's not necessarily any more in-game time - most days you have at least seven hours you're not using for anything anyway, might as well go talk to people. And if you want to do any item crafting, research, waiting for a ship, etc., then you've got plenty of time for RP during that.

And even then, in-game time only matters if you're on a clock. If your plan is "explore this ancient ruin from 1000 years ago", then waiting an extra week or two isn't likely to be an issue.

The case where RL time can be an issue is if the players are really hungry to level up. For that reason, I like to start somewhat above 1st level, where the characters have the abilities to decently realize their concept, and won't mind spending a while before progressing.

[GiantFlyingHog]

I perhaps misrepresented the problem. Not that they didn't want to "piddle-fart", but that they did, but noticed the slowing of XP, and I noticed them wanting to get to the fight, not for the fight itself, but the XP and such to progress their characters. The group enjoyed the roleplaying, but it was doing nothing for the characters.

Ok, this might be a terrible idea, but what if you try raising the amount of xp they get from killing things? If they are naturally leveling up quicker, they might be less insistent on getting to the next fight.

[VincentTakeda]

This is why I like palladium's xp system. Not only does it reward non combat activities in a variety of ways, it puts a premium on doing heroic things, meaning murderhobos advance more slowly than folks who place their lives at great risk for the benefit of others.

[Mordaedil]

If you don't mind taking things slow, treat every session as one encounter, award xp at the end of every session, depending on how hard it was. If they players faced no challenges, reward them EL reward -8 or so. If they faced a roughly normally challenging session, reward at level EL. If they faced extreme hardships or handled really difficult encounters you are impressed by, reward EL +8.

Replace by whether you had fun or not if you want to, it's just a game.

[Eldariel]

You can always standardize level gains and simply state that they are passively acquiring, processing and perfecting skills they've previously been training during the time they aren't actively training. After all, your average D&D commoner is mostly making a living and performing things they've almost mastered - their breadth of learning is quite small and they get relatively little new at any given time particularly since few are driven to be absolutely perfect at their given craft.

Meanwhile, adventurers are mastering a wide array of skills from their training (and presumably constantly training even in their downtime - each character focusing on their own endeavours, but it doesn't take encounters to study spellcraft/divinity/nature, hone one's skill at arms or to perfect various skills) - and any given skill also requires time for the abilities to become fully realized. Even when not training, they are subconsciously processing certain earlier fights, some skills or abilities - or perhaps something they read or studied at an earlier juncture. It's not like a mind is in an on-off state with regards to abilities; surface level mastery and deep mastery are very different matters, but further processing things already learnt does not necessarily require anything but time. And downtime when you aren't acquiring new things in a hurry is the perfect time to consolidate what you've been using and learning.

To take an example, I'm a dancer. When I learn something new in class, I'll initially only get the idea and some crude replications thereof. To actually grok the concept as a whole in a way convenient for my own mind and to internalize what I've learnt, practice helps but particularly a short break really allows for the mind to process the thing and for the pieces to fall in place. And one of the big hurdles in modern education is the lack of boredom and quiet time for introspection and processing one's ideas. Lack of external stimuli is extremely fruitful for learning and particularly for creating and adapting things for your own use.

This is a very real phenomenon, and a convenient excuse to just keep giving XP as long as they don't stop for good. Though there's nothing wrong with some level 20 Commoners who are just really, really driven to master what they do IMHO.

[Darth Ultron]

Ooo. Nice and spicey. Really adds to a conversation.


Doesn't it.

Role-playing is fluff, it jius there for the fun and entertainment of the players. It has very little to do with the crunchy game mechanics. All the role-playing in the world won't make your character better mechanically, but it will make your character better in every other way.

If your playing very Old School RPG, then you don't really role play at all....it's just endless combat and combat related encounters. A lot like when people play ''rpg video games'' and just skip all the fuff text and get to the fighting. More modern D&D as evolved to add in more role playing, but the game has never added more rules for that.

[GilesTheCleric]

This is the reason games like GURPS and Chronicles of Darkness just give you XP at the end of the session - and more, if you roleplayed well or achieved important objectives. I'm sure you could adapt that system somehow for D&D.

This seems like a good system. Are those rules on a wiki somewhere?


My current DM awards XP mostly ad hoc, but it's definitely based on how we handle all three pillars of adventuring (combat, social, exploration).

This is my approach. In my opinion, all xp is fiat (yes, even combat), and the goal of xp is to level up the characters so they can face more difficult/ different challenges. So I just award xp as a reward for having fun, and at a rate that I think will help keep the story moving at the right pace.

My games are also 50%+ social, 25%- combat, and 25%- exploration, so if I didn't award xp for social encounters, the players might feel like they're not making mechanical progress (which they wouldn't be, they'd just be gaining gold, but no xp). Here's two examples of how I grant it. These are from a two-player game; they're currently level 2.
Player A: 100 RP xp, 50 for not allowing anyone's dirty mouths to go uncleaned, 25 for investigating the church of Selûne
Player B: 100 RP xp, 50 for playing the pied piper, 25 for grilling the young Team Jacob Cleric, 50 for writing the campaign log this session

Player A: 50 RP xp, 50 for defeating a skellington
Player B: 50 RP xp, 25 xp for being a "tough guy", 25 xp for scouting out the church of Kelemvor

[Grod_The_Giant]

This seems like a good system. Are those rules on a wiki somewhere?
Uhhuumm... (level*100) a session base, with a bonus of (level*25), (level*50), or (level*100) based on the amount of roleplaying in the session? That has you level up somewhere between once every 5-8 sessions, which I think is a pretty standard speed?

[prufock]

The problem being that it disincentivizes roleplaying, if you want to level up. Since, unless you are gaining intel on your mission, you are spending time that could be spent fighting things to get gameplay rewards. That is, unless you kinda break the world in that just talking with NPCs grants any kind of substantial XP...in which case, why aren't all the townsfolk level 20+?
This is true only on the assumption that the players' only goals are "gaining XP." Players and their characters have many other goals, including:
- solving mysteries
- exploring
- gaining wealth
- gathering an army
- learning about a particular topic
- gaining trust
- interacting with NPCs
- performing a play for the king
- writing the great Eberronian novel
- getting revenge on Dark Lord Evilman for some past misdeed
- atone for own past misdeeds
- get drunk and make pop culture jokes

XP is not the only reward, nor is it necessarily the strongest one.

[Grod_The_Giant]

To be fair, you should absolutely award experience for things other than combat. I just think it's absurd to award experience for self-admitted "piddle-farting."

[Kelb_Panthera]

This is true only on the assumption that the players' only goals are "gaining XP." Players and their characters have many other goals, including:
1 solving mysteries
2 exploring
3 gaining wealth
4 gathering an army
5 learning about a particular topic
6 gaining trust
7 interacting with NPCs
8 performing a play for the king
9 writing the great Eberronian novel
10 getting revenge on Dark Lord Evilman for some past misdeed
11 atone for own past misdeeds
12 get drunk and make pop culture jokes

XP is not the only reward, nor is it necessarily the strongest one.

In point of fact, some of these can or should yield XP for success.

12 is worthless but entertaining in its own right.

3 is, well, yeah. The things you do to get it generally yield XP but the acquistion itself generally doesn't, outside of a heist type scenario.

7 requires a bit more specificity to call. Ad-hoc RP rewards are a thing, though.

9 while certainly quite the accomplishment -probably- doesn't yield XP.

The rest definitely -should- constitute challenges that are rewarded with XP for success.

[OldTrees1]

In point of fact, some of these can or should yield XP for success.

The rest definitely -should- constitute challenges that are rewarded with XP for success.

The list was about player and character goals beyond merely gaining xp. The minor detail that you might reward them xp for some of these goals is irrelevant to those goals being motivating factors & rewards in their own right.

Although clearly it is not a comprehensive list as I could add several items per character I have played.

[Kelb_Panthera]

The list was about player and character goals beyond merely gaining xp. The minor detail that you might reward them xp for some of these goals is irrelevant to those goals being motivating factors & rewards in their own right.

Although clearly it is not a comprehensive list as I could add several items per character I have played.

I get that but the fact remains that XP -is- a motivator and part of the sentiment that created this thread in the first place is that XP gain was erroneously disassociated with such things.

The sense of accomplishment for having overcome a difficult combat is also reward in itself but does get mechanically rewarded as well. The same is true of much of what you listed. I'm trying to highlight that these are not different in that regard since, apparently, that is not commonly understood.

[OldTrees1]

I get that but the fact remains that XP -is- a motivator and part of the sentiment that created this thread in the first place is that XP gain was erroneously disassociated with such things.

The sense of accomplishment for having overcome a difficult combat is also reward in itself but does get mechanically rewarded as well. The same is true of much of what you listed. I'm trying to highlight that these are not different in that regard since, apparently, that is not commonly understood.

1) Not my list, I cannot accept the credit

2) Yes pointing out xp for non combat is important. However the opening post's argument against xp for non combat also needs to be addressed. I think highlighting that both players and characters(PC or NPC) are also motivated by a long list of other motives goes a long ways in solving that concern.

[Kelb_Panthera]

1) Not my list, I cannot accept the credit

Yeah, didn't notice the different name. My mistake.


2) Yes pointing out xp for non combat is important. However the opening post's argument against xp for non combat also needs to be addressed. I think highlighting that both players and characters(PC or NPC) are also motivated by a long list of other motives goes a long ways in solving that concern.

Except there was mention by the OP of his players spoiling for a fight because he apparently -wasn't- giving XP for that sort of thing.

[Flickerdart]

The way I rule it, PCs earn XP for any situation where they stand to lose something, if they fail, or as the price of success. In combat, it's pretty obvious - they are putting their lives at risk. But when they are convincing their local baron and his court that his sheriff is actually a necromancer, they stand to lose social standing, and may have to pull in favors to succeed. When they are setting up a trade caravan to take the million pounds of hydra flesh into the city to sell, they stand to lose their investment, and even if the venture succeeds, they won't see return on their cash for a while.

This encourages goal-based roleplaying. Piddling around can be done off-screen.

[OldTrees1]

Except there was mention by the OP of his players spoiling for a fight because he apparently -wasn't- giving XP for that sort of thing.

Hence why it is so important to address his concerns with giving xp to that sort of thing in order for us to use him giving xp to that sort of thing as a solution.

While it would be best to read it from the source material(the opening post), a paraphrased version would be "If I give xp for non combat, then what explains why Farmers did not go after that xp and become high level?".

One of the great answers to that question is, xp is that not the only motivation.

[Alcore]

It's nice if it's a 'great' answer (don't get me wrong; it is) but if the players don't go along with it then he's back here.

[OldTrees1]

It's nice if it's a 'great' answer (don't get me wrong; it is) but if the players don't go along with it then he's back here.

Huh? It(presuming you were replying to my post) is an answer to the DM's struggles with their own suspension of disbelief. Where do the players fit into it?

If it solves the DM's struggles with adding xp to non combat, & the players don't go along with non combat xp, then he's back here.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Hence why it is so important to address his concerns with giving xp to that sort of thing in order for us to use him giving xp to that sort of thing as a solution.

While it would be best to read it from the source material(the opening post), a paraphrased version would be "If I give xp for non combat, then what explains why Farmers did not go after that xp and become high level?".

One of the great answers to that question is, xp is that not the only motivation.

That wasn't what I got at all.

However, there's a simple enough answer; some farmers -do- get to higher levels but for the most part people avoid things that are actually challenging. They level very slowly because low-risk yields low rewards and most never make it to level 2, much less past it. You do occasionally run into a commoner with -more- levels than you if you go to a big enough settlement.

[Telonius]

Personally, I make it clear to the players beforehand that XP isn't just for killing stuff. The encounters I've designed are challenges to be overcome. How they do that overcoming is up to them. You want to talk your way past the guards? If you succeed you'll get the same XP if you'd fought and beat them. Just talking to random NPCs is not going to get you XP. That NPC has to be, in some way, an obstacle to what you're trying to do; and the task's difficulty and consequences for failure figures in as well. (No XP for haggling the merchant down from 20gp to 15, for example).

[OldTrees1]

That wasn't what I got at all.

However, there's a simple enough answer; some farmers -do- get to higher levels but for the most part people avoid things that are actually challenging. They level very slowly because low-risk yields low rewards and most never make it to level 2, much less past it. You do occasionally run into a commoner with -more- levels than you if you go to a big enough settlement.

Below is a fragment of the opening post. You will note that beneath the hyperbole is a concern about high level townsfolk.

For our solution to the players' motivation (xp for non combat) to be useful to the OP, this concern needs to be addressed. Your answer is that they have reasons to avoid actual challenge when possible. Pointing out townsfolk have motivations beyond merely gaining xp would help the OP accept that answer.


The problem being that it disincentivizes roleplaying, if you want to level up. Since, unless you are gaining intel on your mission, you are spending time that could be spent fighting things to get gameplay rewards. That is, unless you kinda break the world in that just talking with NPCs grants any kind of substantial XP...in which case, why aren't all the townsfolk level 20+?

[prufock]

In point of fact, some of these can or should yield XP for success.
Yes, they can. The point, though, is that different players will be motivated by different things; with or without XP gains, players enjoy different types of scenes. Intrinsic motivations matter. Individual differences matter.

A game in which combat sees no XP or monetary gain still has players engaging enemies in combat because combat is exciting. If, however, the game is poorly-designed, or your encounter is poorly-designed, combat will not be exciting and even the carrot of XP gains dangled over them will make players groan. Games in which NPC interaction doesn't produce XP will still see NPC interaction if the NPCs are interesting; if they are mind-numbingly boring, the XP gain is a consolation prize only.

My own group has adopted the "milestone" variant; I haven't noticed any changes in the amount of roleplaying, combat, exploration, or any other facet of the games. Our reason was different - players didn't like "falling behind" others if they weren't involved in an encounter, and we didn't really like the XP costs for crafting and stuff. But still, I haven't noticed any difference in the amount of crafting or XP component spells used either.

XP is just one tool in the DM's toolbox.

[Aetis]

I run a game for murder-hobo group of thugs who constantly bug NPCs for directions to gold and xp island. (usually before killing them for gold and xp)

They however understand that there is a Big Bad hatching his evil scheme somewhere in the town and try their best to figure out where he is before he gets too strong. This sometimes involves talking normally to NPCs.

Roleplaying isn't for everyone.

[Quertus]

So, would it be reasonable to generalize this conversion to, "what behaviors do different XP systems reward" and "what would a realistic world with such rules in place look like"?

Call of Cthulhu gives XP on a per session basis. Combat is extremely lethal. Research can actually be useful. All this combines to encourage a play style that is as slow and methodical as possible, rewarding wisdom and planning over heroism and faith.

In most of my experience with it, D&D has given XP for overcoming challenges, the most obvious of which is by killing monsters. It doesn't matter whether it takes 1 session or 20, you earn the same XP for overcoming the same challenge. This makes the system style-neutral: however you overcome the challenge, you receive the same reward.

Some systems - and some DMs in D&D - adjust the XP you receive based on how much difficulty you had with the challenge. Thus, the stupider you are, the more XP you get for overcoming a given challenge. These cases reward heroism and faith over wisdom and planning.

So where does role-playing come into the picture?

Well, if it is in character to carefully plan, and never take on a challenge until you know you can win, then the first type of game (and certain early versions of D&D ) will encourage you to roleplay correctly, whereas the last type of game will punish you for role-playing. If it is in character to be brave and heroic, then the last type of game will encourage you to roleplay correctly, whereas the first type of game will punish you for role-playing. If it is in character to overcome challenges, then the second type of game will reward you for role-playing correctly; if, instead, it is in character to be a couch potato or generally avoid conflict, then the second type of system will punish you for role-playing.

Where does combat fit into this? Nowhere. IMO, if you stop role-playing when the combat dice come out, you're doing something wrong.

As to what that means for the world at large, well, NPCs usually aren't involved in metagame "sessions".