XP for money?

[larsdangly]

It recently occurred to me that TFT, played in its 'game-iest', dungeon-crawl-iest way imaginable, might be well suited to that classic D+D approach of awarding experience points for treasure. Some people dislike the pace of character advancement in TFT, and this would certainly fix that. And it avoids the problem that you can't go far in TFT by getting XP for murdering things because you will almost certainly get killed. Who cares if you murder monsters; all you really want is their loot! Anyway, I was wondering whether anyone had done this.

[TippetsTX]

Personally, I think awarding XP for gold leads to the wrong tone for the game and encourages less-than-ideal player behaviors. Plus it isn't reasonable to assume that every challenge or creature will have some kind of treasure associated with it. This model led to some the worst aspects of character motivation and progression in our AD&D games back in the day (which I, admittedly, abused to create my OP 25th level Cavalier).

[Skarg]

To me, XP awards based on gold scream "illogical D&D nonsense", and I wouldn't even do that if I were playing D&D (which I almost never do because of all the nonsense).

[Steve Plambeck]

The whole idea feels a little dirty to me. And illogical. Gold is supposed to be in and of itself a reward; the thing you exchange for upgrades to your gear. Why would you reward anyone for having been rewarded? Double dipping at its most obvious.

To anyone who has ever said there isn't enough XP in the game I always say then you, as the GM, should be awarding more XP for the things that already earn XP. Problem solved. If you're not the GM, then bring it up with the GM.

Or lower the cost of increasing attributes. I think that's become way too expensive with the Legacy edition of ITL.

[Chris Rice]

It can work well for D&D style dungeon crawl campaigns, in fact I prefer it to XP for killing Monsters. Since the PCs don't get anything for killing the monsters they will try to avoid fighting if possible and often find more creative solutions to get their hands on the treasure.

[larsdangly]

I'm with Chris on this one. I don't award XP for money in my main TFT campaign (and never have). But the game's components now go so far toward supporting a sort of high-baroque dungeon crawl experience that I think it is appropriate to ask what XP system makes the most sense in such a game. Given the pace and goals and dangers of that shape how dungeon crawling works, it is hard to think of something more appropriate than treasure as your basic advancement economy. This is how D+D worked for a billion years and, much as people criticize its 'meta' gamey-ness, millions of people played this way and liked it.

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by larsdangly

... it is hard to think of something more appropriate than treasure as your basic advancement economy.

What do you think is or is not "appropriate" that has it hard for you to think of something more appropriate?

Because, to me, it seems very easy to think of more appropriate things than treasure. Mainly, actual experiences of dangerous and difficult things that might make someone become better at facing dangerous and difficult situations. Kind of like the original TFT rules did.

Originally Posted by larsdangly

This is how D+D worked for a billion years and, much as people criticize its 'meta' gamey-ness, millions of people played this way and liked it.

Millions of people who were not like me and my friends. There are reasons why D&D was a laughing stock for us, and this was one of them.


"I fought and defeated sixty fearsome monsters, but they didn't happen to have any wealth, or I didn't manage to get anything valuable away from them, so I guess I didn't learn anything from that experience."

"Ah lad, while you were battling those monsters, I sneaked by and found something really valuable. So now I am stronger and more agile than you are. Better luck next time."

[larsdangly]

I don't know if it is intentional, but that last message comes across as surprisingly angry considering that we're just blathering about some common ways people have approached roleplaying games.

[Skarg]

I'm not and wasn't angry, so sorry for that impression.

But I am baffled by an extremely experienced TFT player writing "it is hard to think of something more appropriate than treasure as your basic advancement economy", as it seems to me original TFT had XP guidelines that made vastly more sense than XP based on money, and that XP based on money has what seem to me to be obvious problems and illogical effects.

[Chris Rice]

I've been playing TFT since 1980 and have toyed with many XP or advancement mechanisms. For basis dungeon crawling games/campaigns I've come to prefer cash for experience over other methods. For example, giving XP for killing enemies tends to lead too much to an emphasis on combat. In a fairly deadly game like TFT that means you won't live long. If, on the other hand, you give XP for treasure, then I've found the players will try to find other means than fighting to get at the loot. There are of course other ways to award XP; Role Playing, Session based, etc.