Treasure and EXP interchangeability - Does It Work In 5e?

[Vrock_Summoner]

Hello fellow player-race humanoids! The idea here is pretty simple. In older editions of D&D (and Basic Fantasy) there were optional and/or default rules (depending on which specific version) for using treasure as EXP - you'd get a certain amount of gold or whatever from a dungeon, take it back to town, and you'd either get EXP based on your haul or actually have to spend the gold to level up. I thought this would be an interesting option to re-implement for a game I'm going to run in 5e which has very strong creative ties to Dark Souls. The idea is that experience points are an actual, literal thing in the game world that can be transferred around and used as currency, but can also be applied to the self to gain levels the normal way. I'd probably eschew gold as a reward almost entirely and force them to rely on their EXP for both leveling and large purchases, mostly to balance out the fact that, in Dark Souls fashion, I'm going to rely on difficult encounter design and don't want them blasting through level ups too quickly. Level ups tend to take more XP and increase at a greater rate than WBL, which, if I've estimated correctly, should mean that even though it's technically affordable earlier, it's generally going to be practical to purchase gear at no more than assumed WBL. The biggest potential downside I see is characters of the party being unbalanced by hitting different levels at different times, but again, scaling experience (and whatever nifty item(s) is costing you your place right alongside the other party members) should keep people roughly in line with one another.

What do you guys think? It's not something that most games should probably try, but do you think this could work as a cog in the overall machine to make the game feel more Dark Souls-y and engaged?

[Laserlight]

I've seen a Swords & Sorcery setting -- Primeval Thule, perhaps?--advocate that the players be able to cash in GP for XP, to encourage a feeling of bringing home fabulous wealth, and burning through it quickly, leading to scenes like "Where is the Eye of the Serpent? Rexor said that you gave it to a girl, probably for a mere night's pleasure." I don't recall an explicit statement "we have playtested this and it works well" but that's not to say it wasn't there.

The potential problem that immediately leaps to mind is the Jerk stealing from the party, or trying to con the DM into "Hey, the rest of the guys are totally busy fighting, so I make a Sleight of Hand to palm the treasure box and hide it without them seeing." Although as a DM, I'd be very, very tempted to say "You rolled a 19? Okay, you surreptitiously lift the small coffer mimic and shove it into your pants without anyone noticing."

[Vrock_Summoner]

Yeah, that's another reason I'd probably go for the EXP as the main source of wealth rather than the other way around - if it's mainly an internal/spectral thing that can only be passed around willingly or if killed, that'll make it nearly impossible for outright stealing to become the best strategy. Might not even be the best option to kill, if the person is liable to come back vengeful... But that's another issue entirely.

[TrinculoLives]

I mean, it certainly gives you something to do with treasure, which is kind of nice. The choice becomes for the player: do I save up for that Platemail I want, or do I boost my level?

I don't think I'd use a 1:1 trade of gold to experience. Maybe a 1:2 or so.

Edit: Oh I didn't get it at first. I don't like the idea of having gold and XP be a single pool. I can just see some players ignoring item purchases as much as possible in order to speed ahead in levels. At least if gold and XP were handed out separately, and gold was a less-efficient way to gain XP, there would be less motivation to burn all your gold and XP to level.

[Vrock_Summoner]

The thing there is, if you purchase a reasonable amount of equipment, it's not going to hold you back for long enough, and will do a lot more for you, than that next level, especially with how bounded things are in 5e. Like, equipment is almost essential to rounding out your abilities as time passes. Like, if you're playing an offensive Warlock, a Rod of the Pact Keeper might very well be worth spending, what, one extra fight at a lower level? If you're playing a Champion Fighter, wouldn't some means of flight do more for you than critting a little better for a couple of battles? And that's assuming everybody else isn't upgrading in the same way. If somebody decides levels are literally all they care about, and they end up trading both variety and potency for somewhat earlier access to their next class features, then they're both probably heavily gimping themselves, and not really doing anything that can't be quickly readjusted if it turns out to have been a bad idea.

Unless my math about the comparative value of equipment and levels is off, of course...

[Beelzebubba]

What isn't obvious about the whole 'treasure = XP' mechanic in the old games is that it makes characters into clever scheming heist specialists instead of combat murder machines. Leaving the monsters alive and getting out without a single HP damage done, but all the XP and treasure, was one of the most fun things to do. It was also safer.

IMO, consider what behavior those XP/loot changes will give incentives to. Making XP of loot equal to or less than combat won't make characters avoid combat, since killing a monster will result in double the reward for about the same amount of work - the threat of the monster is gone, so you can loot at your leisure. Only making treasure XP significantly more valuable than combat XP will make characters start avoiding combat.

So, my take is, it's not whether it will work or not - it's what kind of game will happen because of it.

[Tanarii]

1 Gold is not worth 1 XP in 5e. It's worth very roughly 12 times as much in tier 1, and 4 times as much in tier 2. For example expected rewards from hoards (for one member of a 5 person party) for Tier 1 is 560 GP, but needed XP to hit level 5 is 6500. Expected for all Hoards through level 11 is 24100gp vs 85000xp.


IMO, consider what behavior those XP/loot changes will give incentives to. Making XP of loot equal to or less than combat won't make characters avoid combat, since killing a monster will result in double the reward for about the same amount of work - the threat of the monster is gone, so you can loot at your leisure. Only making treasure XP significantly more valuable than combat XP will make characters start avoiding combat.Agreed. If XP can be spent 1:1 for GP value of gear, when the amount reqwarded is up to 12:1, the PCs will move to Chaotic Evil before they exit Tier 1. :smallamused:

[Kane0]

So make it about 10gp:1xp perhaps?