Why was XP for gold largely abandoned as a way to reward players?
>>97161391Because the style of gameplay and games that supported this way of rewarding players went out of popularity about 40 years ago.Next thing, you gonna ask why rotory dial phones got abandoned
>>97161391because the door-monster-treasure routine gets old really fast
>>97161391If you want kick-in-the-door action you need to incentivise action, not looting and selling dungeon fixtures for every possible copper. If you want tense, gritty survival it makes no sense to risk life and limb for some nebulous amount of gold once you have tavern establishment money. If you want a fantasy heroism story like lotr then it doesn't work to have gold mentioned much. XP for Gold was mostly a way to double-pay for completed mission objectives but the desired gameplay loop changed.
>>97161391Gold provides "fictional positioning" where it gives you in-universe wealth and status. XP provides tangible mechanical benefits. Tying these two together is actually pretty limiting in the kind of story you can tell, because not everyone wealthy is powerful and not everyone powerful is wealthy
>>97161391Well, the whole point of gathering treasure is so by high level you could own a castle and have knights under your command.
>>97161391Getting Hoarding more Gold is bad
new players want combat, to the point combat became a more-and-more elaborate 'subsystem' (almost a game in itself). if you asked a young player, 'make a Combat (Strength) vs Combat (Dexterity) skill check...19 against 7, success! you kill the goblin rogues!' they would moan.the point of the game in the Fantasy Adventure Game days was exploring dungeons and collecting treasure. to me that's interesting fun and has a stellar risk-reward system to it. a game loop in a way vidya people say (it's just the 'procedure of play' in the actual books).the other newer thing is 'story' and 'quests' in the vidya sense. you advanced The Plot, have 500 XP each. that makes absolutely NO sense to me: so...it can just happen, at any time? what if The Plot was when you and the group decided to free those prisoners down on level 5?just a matter of taste, really. but i definitely prefer gold-for-XP. it means you have the information, and a very obvious goal, with different ways to get there. it's like a well-oiled machine.
>>97161553Close but my next question is what's a rotory phone?My question after that is why did rotary phones get abandoned?
>>97163638A phone that uses a rotating dial instead of a keypad, you often see them in older TV shows. Nobody uses them anymore except for aesthetics because a keypad is infinitely easier to use.
>>97161391it's gay and dumb like you
>>97162947Your "what if" question doesn't make any sense. If that was The Plot, then you got XP from it. What are you confused about?
>>97162947>the other newer thing is 'story' and 'quests' in the vidya sense. you advanced The Plot, have 500 XP each. that makes absolutely NO sense to meYou've had 30 years to figure it out.
>>97163662I kinda want one...
>>97161553Rotary phones dropped out of existence for technical reasons and advancement in actual, actionable, material technology, not for a change in popularity by itself, you stupid fucking mongoloid. Fucking retard.>>97163662>>97164053They are actually very pleasing in many tactile ways, but their inferiority of usability is what saw them go the way of the dodo. In an age where home phones are dying even as a concept, a rotary phone would unfortunately be a decorative piece at best - although it should be trivial to design a fully functional cordless one, which could be cool, maybe with bluetooth hooked up to your smartphone. That'd be quite cool.>>97162947>the other newer thing is 'story' and 'quests' in the vidya sense. you advanced The Plot, have 500 XP each. that makes absolutely NO sense to meThat's because you're a clueless autistic idiot. You traditionally get awarded experience not for "advancing le plot xD" but for overcoming challenges, whatever they were, and the completion of distinct chunks (usually at the end of sessions, but often based on the collected events overcomed, such as the entirety of a dungeon or the savior of the princess or whatever).This is a trivial concept to grasp unless you're literally, factually, actually mentally challenged. Reconsider suicide.
>>97161391>Why was XP for gold largely abandoned as a way to reward players?gold makes you rich, it does not make you a more skilled fighter, mage or priest etcits a moronic and wortless monopoly-like tier tabletop game remnant that has no place in rpgs.
>>97161391Because it supports the lies of imperialism. You think it's an innocent action to invade a dungeon and genocide it's natives while taking their resources and artifacts? Fuck you and your hylic ways.
>>97164901lol seething subhuman
>>97161391Because getting XP for the things your character has actually accomplished, rather than if they managed to bring back enough loot, makes more sense and allows for more interesting play. With Gold as XP, if your party decides to flee out of fear for the well-being of their party members or because they know they won't survive, the game can continue and develop. If the only way they level up is if they get the loot, then they are more likely to keep rushing in and get themselves killed, because murderhobo behavior is the only thing truly being incentivized.Also, the faggots whining about Gold as XP are not grogs. They are wannabe BrOSR faggots who get their opinions from twitter culturewar retards who can't keep a game going for more than a couple sessions, if they can get anyone to actually show up for their bullshit old school games in the first place.
>>971649017/10 It was >you hylic ways that tipped the hand. Figure out how its used and you'll be able to bait better with it.
>>97165546>Also, the faggots whining about Gold as XP are not grogs. They are wannabe BrOSR faggots who get their opinions from twitter culturewar retards who can't keep a game going for more than a couple sessions, if they can get anyone to actually show up for their bullshit old school games in the first place.this is accurate
>>97161391Because it pointlessly limits games to being about treasure seeking instead of potentially something more interesting.
>>97161391It's redundant.1. Gold is already a reward.2. Players are already loot-obsessed murderhobos.
>>97161391Because games got more diverse, and not everything is about gaining gold anymore.
>>97161391We still use it
>>971613911. It doesn't reflect the reality of how people actually learn and practice skills. If you spend a lot of time fighting, you don't become incapable of learning how to fight better just because you didn't get paid for it.2. Some players want to pursue goals that don't immediately give monetary rewards but still want to gain experience.
>>97161391I ran an xp-for-gold OSR campaign beforeWhat ends up happening is that players don't want to take any risks, which means they don't get treasure, which means they don't level upI had to constantly remind them "if you don't get any treasure then you're not going to level up or advance your character at all"And very often they would still say "no" because they didn't want to risk their level 1 character dying.Basically, modern gamers are very hard pressed to view their D&D characters as arcade game avatars. They subconsciously role play their characters with strong sense of self preservation. Why are they playing D&D? Who fucking knows.
>>97164178and just like phones, we invented better games, so the old games stopped being popular. retard.
>>97161391Cause it was stupid.
>>97166026I recall seeing a specific clique of poseur "hardcore" RPG enthusiasts who would unironically say shit like>as Gygax intendedconstantly passing around blog posts and twitter threads about how this one old school try from some old edition of D&D they could never actually cite, would make every game perfect and make players want to show up every week and how that was the secret to running amazing long-term games that go on for years. None of them had played in a while and all of them had excuses for why they weren't actively running or playing in a game at the time.
>>97164178caused them to go the way of the dodo. not saw. illiterate dumbfuck.
>>97166961>why are roleplayers playing a roleplaying gameTruly, mystery for the ages. Why don't you play proper wargames instead of bitching about RPGs not being wargames?
>>97166085there is nothing more interesting.
>>97167009More like why are they playing DUNGEONS & DRAGONS if they don't want to engage in with the dungeon or slay dragons?If you only want to explore a dungeon and fight dragons when you will win 99% of the time, what is the point?Why not play a different system?
>>97166961characters are avatars moron. if you die you don't level up. self preservation is obviously good.
>>97167027A character dying at level 1, with no xp, and a mediocre stat line is inconsequential
>>97167023why do you expect players to rush to their deaths? they won't gain anything.
>>97167036does dying help you level up?
>>97167015I pity whoever has to play with you.
>>97167048my games are better than yours and my players have more fun than your players.
>>97167037>>97167045See, this is what I'm talking about.If you don't take at least SOME risks you don't get magic items or level up.You have no reason to NOT take risks with your mediocre level 1 new character. Just play the fucking game, retards.
>>97167066how much xp do you get for dying?
>>97167070>agree to play turn based card game>refuse to pass turn because you might lose>game grinds to a halt and stalls because nothing is happeningthat's what you are advocating, dumbass
>>97167070The same amount you get for doing nothing.
>>97167066You are now aware of where you are, and why the people who are here, are here.
>>97164178>you're literally, factually, actually mentally challenged. Reconsider suicide.Peak irony
>>97161391Because modules started being built with the idea of you going to a location and killing a boss enemy rather than going to a location and exploring. There is less of a focus on dungeoneering and exploration and more on fighting a clear threat without having to worry about going back to town to drop off loot.
>>97166961This is partially due to a shift in character building paradigm. Until 3e edition released, D&D character creation could be considered quick and simple. Roll stats; chose race; chose class; chose equipment; start playing. This played heavily into emergent story and losing a level 1 character was not a great loss. The current character building paradigm leads to character creation taking longer, more work, requires long term planing and assumes creative resources have been invested in the character to the point where loss at level 1 is considered a great tragedy.
>>97167401>This played heavily into emergent story This is that bullshit that comes from guys who think "My faceless chump randomly did some stuff" is a story. That's not a story, that's a half-remembered dream, and about as interesting to listen to. The OSR retards who keep repeating that same sales pitch and then complain about "storytelling/storyshitting" or whatever dumb forced meme they're currently working on, really are just trying to make their embarrassingly dull game stories seem somehow better even though they still can't get anyone to care about them.Stories developing from character actions happens in every game, not just games where characters start as empty mannequins, and trying to pretend that older editions have some kind of monopoly on "emergent" stories is a particularly lame and deceptive form of coping.
>>97167485At the same time--and, for the record, I'm not a "Bob the Fighting-Man" type of guy--I have definitely had players show up before with character concepts that flat-out denied room for growth and development. Sometimes, it wasn't even part of the character concept, just how the person played. However, that phenomenon isn't one that is inherent to having a backstory or playing any particular edition.What is true is that a good roleplayer can start with a bare mannequin and spin a compelling story out of what transpires in the game. A good roleplayer can also build a character with a specific concept in mind, giving the GM a solid backstory and making use of game mechanics and character options to have a soundly-built character right out of the gate, and still spin a compelling story out of what transpires in the game. I tend to prefer the latter, if only because it enables both the players and the GM to explore a larger number of starting configurations, but I'd look askance at bringing anyone into the group if I didn't think they were capable of the former.
>>97161391Doesn't it extra super incentivize loot as the core reason and goal behind everything more than it is already?
>>97167485Seething tranny
>>97161391Sometimes you get jumped by broke ass mfers. Or animals who don't have currency. Or OP's father, see above.
>>97162947>you asked a young player, 'make a Combat (Strength) vs Combat (Dexterity) skill check...19 against 7, success! you kill the goblin rogues!'absolutely no early ttrpg ever worked this way, ever. Tabletop roleplaying grew out of tabletop wargaming. Even in OD&D combat was still by far the most involved aspects of gameplay, the novelty was controlling an individual "hero unit" adventurer instead of an entire squad or battalion of soldiers and giving them a name and backstory as you fought and grew stronger. Early fighters had name levels of hero and superhero directly taken from chainmail units, it's the equivalent of somebody playing 40k and wanting an entire game where they just play as their Captain alongside a Librarian so you make a 40k RPG."Roll your combat skill to auto win combat like it's picking a lock" is something firmly in PBTA handwavium territory that sees the tabletop wargaming legacy as embarrassing and goes out of its way to snub and de-emphasize combat as much as possible
>>97168659The post you replied to didn't claim that any game worked that way.
>>97167084Exactly. You get the behavior you incentivize. If you want different behavior, design your game differently.
>>97167872Falseflagging tranner, you cannot be more obvious lol
>>97167485It is a story, and whether it's interesting is entirely irrelevant. Story is the result of choices made during play, and nothing else. End of discussion.
>>97168790>it is a storyThat is literally the lowest qualification available, the "give the loser in last place a participation prize" standard.>Story is the result of choices made during play, and nothing elseOh, you're just genuinely retarded and not actually making real posts. Here's your chance to run away, fix your own mistake and apologize for being so stupid, or double down on your bullshit, and I'm telling you right now that if your plan is the latter, I'm going to beat the living piss out of you in under ten words, so think twice.
>>97169216didn't refute anything I said because you can't.
>>97161391Because D&D was never a good game, but tried to learn from other better systems that used different reward systems.
>>97165546The only thing about 5e existing I'm thankful for is that it got me into the hobby. The first time I'm actually having fun running a successful game is running a west marches OSE campaign. And having Gold as XP AND for spending it, effectively giving out double XP. So how does this work so well? It has incentivized my players to play in a way that is predictable. With these play pretend imagination games this is quite important, because if anything goes, GM can't prepare without railroading/quantum ogreing stuff.>If the only way they level up is if they get the loot, then they are more likely to keep rushing in and get themselves killed, because murderhobo behavior is the only thing truly being incentivized.You got it wrong. If this is your perception on OSR styles of play I'm not surprised of your attitude. The point is for the players to make ingenious plans to get the treasure without endangering their characters. Trick, bribe, outmaneuver, trap, cajole, scare or sneak by the monsters etc. Whatever you can come up with that makes sense within the (consistent) fiction and the basic fundamental rules or rulings.Murderhobos fail, that's true. The only style of play that truly encourages murderhoboing is WotC era D&D linear adventures. They got a module after module filled with sequences of fair fights, incentivizing violence and tactical combat, not making meaningful choices outside fights.Gold as XP works the finest when the players...a) want to go explore for treasure without GM having to motivate them with a story plot that makes the players feel obliged rather than genuinely free agents b) encounter threats and hazards because D&D is not Animal Crossing (or shouldn't be)c) overcome challenges all by their own ingenuity simultaneously generating interactive emergent storytelling d) receive tangible PC progression that feels truly earned.
>>97162947Story XP was in AD&D adventure modules.
>>97169301>retard troll doubles down, as expected"Choices based on what, and what about?"
>>97169377yep, no rebuttal. you lose.
>>97169378lol, you suck at trolling. Here's a last pity (you) for so blatantly trying to dodge those questions because you know they fuck you so hard.
>>97169384questions don't refer to anything, no rebuttal, you lose.
>>97169344>You got it wrong. If this is your perception on OSR styles of play I'm not surprised of your attitude. The point is for the players to make ingenious plans to get the treasure without endangering their characters. Trick, bribe, outmaneuver, trap, cajole, scare or sneak by the monsters etc. Whatever you can come up with that makes sense within the (consistent) fiction and the basic fundamental rules or rulings.There's really nothing stopping anyone from doing this with any edition. OSRfags thinking they've cracked some special secret riddle by touting this shit are just kind of exposing that they didn't actually read any of their books as closely as they pretend to.
>>97169465The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.For example D&D 4e is a tactical combat game. If you solve challenges and defeat your foes without violence, you'd better play with a rulebook that's not 99% combat rules and character options that effect mainly combat.You are right that nobody is stopping you from playing in whatever style in any edition, but should you? Go run a survival dungeon crawl in 5e or CoC cosmic horror investigation adventure in 4e, and then tell me the system does not matter.
>>97169563>Go run a survival dungeon crawl in 5e...You're aware that 5e was built to enable that, right? That there's actually a pretty active OSR-using-5e scene, right?CoC in 4e is just you shitposting a bit, but I'm actually concerned about what kind of rock you live under if "survival dungeon crawl in 5e" is some sort of impossible challenge to you, or even something that isn't a popular option played by thousands of groups.
>>971695975e trivializes basic stuff like light, rations, traditional adventuring gear and tools. Those thousands of groups you mentioned could use a better system that doesn't hinder the style of play and improve their game.I'm willing to try out 5.5 if you try out some basic OSE.
>>971696935e offers the ability to trivialize those. Un-trivializing them can be as easy as saying "Rations actually matter and no Goodberry". It's much, much easier to add a few subsystems that add the book-keeping you have such a hard-on for onto a competent, modern system like 5e, then it is to take the ass-backwards designs of older editions, with their terrible combat, nonsensical exploration subsystems and mechanics, and clumsy and obtuse writing and structure, and somehow turn them into an enjoyable experience, all for the sake of "Look, you have to track torches!"5e has rations, torches, traditional adventuring gear and tools. By default, they're not that important, because decades ago people discovered that they can carry enough torches/rations/gear that it's only if things go completely tits up (and you have much more important problems to deal with) that running out of them is going to be a concern. They almost exist just to punish completely new players who don't know the appropriate amount to carry just yet. But, if you're the kind of close-minded grognard who actually thinks "old rules must equal good rules" and that those are vital to the "survival dungeon crawl" experience as opposed to tracking stuff like health/spell slots/potions/escape routes/etc., it's hardly an effort to tailor the game to your particular specifications without losing all the QoL modernizations it otherwise has.
>>97163946>>97164178>>97169346other points aside (there are some good ones) you're not telling me anything new with this.it's a bad mechanic. but the expectation for it as some default is there. i've heard it called 'milestone XP'? put another way, introducing vidya game quests (and i am NOT saying video games invented quests, not even games did, you know exactly what i mean but here is a whole parenthetical to hedge that off)...introducing vidya quests has utterly fucked expectations, people expect that, you're solving quests, aren't you? that's the goal of the game, not only does it advance the plot, but you level up for it!now imagine taking away combat XP. ever.>b-but we killed 5 goblins!>no sorry Timmy, XP is for quest completion.they took away gold-for-XP. and yet increased the prominence of storygaming XP. the books even encourage shit like>wow, that matched your Personality Trait! 50 XP.and>that was a great speech, you roleplayed a whole court case with rolling a Charisma check! 100 points to Gryffindor.it's shit, you guys. really shit.
>>97169774what you're describing as though it's boring actually sounds (and is) really tense and fun.'tedious bookkeeping' isn't even that bad. it's the most basic maths. you keep track of SO MANY resources in 5E, you can add/subtract HP but not...torches? how many Bardic Inspiration rolls you have left, but rations are busywork?some systems do a middle-ground like how in Dungeon World, you have the actual item Adventuring Gear and *poof!* 1/5 of its uses gone, you now have A Ladder.don't you want to feel like you're actually going on an adventure, with all the survival stuff, the risk-reward that matters? if you just scale everything up to the point of Dragon Ball Z fights then, well, why NOT have those prior-to-centuries-ago problems you describe?it's not some handy quality-of-life improvement. it's actually a worse game. 5E has a couple of paragraphs about time, but it doesn't have something as simple as turns (which were already an abstraction, read how Holmes Basic describes one game turn).
>>97169867>now imagine taking away combat XP. ever.If you can comprehend the idea of giving out XP for beating some goblins, is it so hard to comprehend the DM tallying up all the XP from all the monsters in the dungeon, and then giving it all to you in a lump sum after you rescue the princess from the dragon?I dunno what to tell you anon. You might just be retarded.
>>97169898i mean if you come up with some thing like beating != killing (sneaking past, bribing, diplomacy, burning the tower down) then i do think that's lovely.but really it should be a pittance. the main source of XP (at least in D&D) should be from gold as XP. you know what that motivates you to do, by its very nature? get treasure out of the dungeon without the monsters stopping or killing you.
>>97161391Because, as has been pointed out, the way games are run has (generally speaking) changed. Back in the day, a lot of adventures were your typical cycle of:>Go into dungeon>Get Loot>Build Status>RepeatThe goal was to go and get rich, and because things were dangerous you would later use your wealth to buy hirelings, holds, armies, and so on to improve your odds of getting more gold and so on and so forth.Now - and it's been this way for a long, long time, 30+ years now - the loop has changed. Rather than just fighting monsters and getting loot, people want actual adventures. They want to experience a game like the fantasy stories of their era (LOTR for the oldfags, Warcraft and D&D adventure novels for the 90s kids, eragon and narnia for the 2000s kids, whatever isekai slop is popular for the 2010s kids), they don't want something that they can get out of Vidya (Roguelikes are a very accurate representation of old, OLD D&D, not 1:1 due to the limitations of vidya but the basic concepts are present), they want freedom and branching, emergent narratives. So the games evolved with the times (for the most part). Now, it's about the characters, both player and non-player, in the fictional world of the game, about heroes and monsters, about a more selfless, heroic goal than "get rich". The evolution of progression in TTRPGs went Gold-as-XP > XP for kills > XP for quests > Milestones for narrative progression. A good milestone system, of course, has clear guidelines on when progression happens. I've myself moved to a baseline "Milestone per 3 sessions" which gives progression resources to spend, with variant options for per one session (one/two-shots or short games) and per five sessions (longform games) with my TTRPGs. It's a solid system that allows the GM to easily plan encounters and know when to expect spikes in player power.
>>97169882>actually sounds (and is) really tense and fun.It's not. Initially, it might seem that way, but with experience it becomes just an added chore, like how playing a game of tic-tac-toe to enter a city might be a cute novelty the first time around but is nothing but a waste of time the fiftieth time, to the point where the whole group would just beg to skip it. Once you know the game well enough, it not even a game anymore.There's no great challenge to tracking those mundane things, and they do nothing to actually add to the feeling of going on an adventure. If anything, they make an adventure feel more like packing for a vacation, and it's amazing that you've decided to try and champion the worst part of going for a holiday. Have you ever met anyone, anyone, who said their favorite part of traveling was figuring out a budget, packing their luggage, purchasing tickets and passes and car rentals and hotels bookings? Everyone else is out there going "I love swimming in the ocean" or "I love having coke-fueled gangbangs with teenage prostitutes", and you're acting like what every vacation really needs is an hour-long argument with your wife over whether the souvenir you want to purchase will make your suitcase too heavy for the flight back.If anything, the things you seem to love exist as deliberately unfun chores made just so that being able to ignore them has greater value. The magical glowing sword is suddenly far more valuable when it means you no longer have to waste valuable brain space on tracking torches.
>>97161391Gold-to-XP rewarded a single gameplay loop. It worked, but players wanted different accomplishments rewarded (such as killing monsters or achieving goals), instead.
>>97169915XP is experience. If every monster in the dungeon is killed by something that's not you, you venture into an empty dungeon and leave with piles of gold, you shouldn't get XP.You should get XP for doing things and learning, progressing your character. Not for getting something as easily replaceable as money.
>>97169915>i mean if you come up with some thing like beating != killing (sneaking past, bribing, diplomacy, burning the tower down) then i do think that's lovely.Yeah, that's why the quest XP works. Because you just calculate all the monsters in there, and the final tally can be the same with the assumption that the PCs have gotten past everything one way or another. >the main source of XP (at least in D&D) should be from gold as XP.It's fine if you prefer that anon. Gold as XP has plenty of upsides. It just doesn't do you any favors to act clueless about how other XP systems function when you're going to say one is the best.
>>97169977Mundane makes the fantasy stand out more. Realism makes the milieu more grounded and PCs feel exceptional having those magic items at later levels. Suddenly that glowing sword is useful when the GM actually enforces darkness penalties. True adventuring is not a fucking holiday, it's braving the unexpected dangers. It's going to the Lonely or the Doom Mountain and facing all the unknown challenges between beginning and the end. That's why it's so exciting because you don't know what is out there. Preparation for the journey IS the main game itself. If you waive simple climbing, darkness and nourishment challenges by making them too easy, suddenly spells like Fly, Light and Create Food and Water are much less useful and thus do not feel like powerful magic. Resource management is the whole point of player skill and thus better player enjoyment.If anything goes and everything's fun and easy all the time it will not feel real or earned. If you remove those chores, eventually the game devolves to a slippery slope towards Mother may I and improv theater. That's fine if you don't want to actually play a game that can be won or lost, and feeling you earned the result afterwards.
>>97169977mate it's the point of the game. you can't "gloss over" e.g. items and equipment because they're not "flavour text" or "fluff", they're....just what the items actually are. you use rope how rope is used. you need food to survive. read the X half of B/X, where it gives an example of outfitting an adventuring party for actually travelling. if your attention span is at "can't we just SKIP AHEAD to the city?" would you not want a tolerance reset, of sorts? i want to play Lord of the Rings, not a shounen anime.
>>97161391It wasn't really, the principle was just expanded beyond that as a more broad "xp from overcoming challenges". Issue is it was never properly reformulated, nor correctly explained, as in stating the actual need for a, game specific, thematic choice for the primary source of xp. For example, you want a game about monster hunting? Then the majority (if not all) xp has to came with slaying (and not simply defeating) monsters. Do you want a game about exploration? You get xp by mileages, discoveries and daring scouting actions. Do you want a game about intrigue? You get xp by successfully engineering scenarios, discovering secrets and networking, etc... You get the idea.
>>97161391Because 1st ed was based on the wargame Chainmail so was pretty basic in format. Then 2nd ed (designed to remove D&D from Gygax by the new owners, while milking his creation's fame) changed it. 2nd ed brought in the idea of xp from doing class specific tasks. Fighters from fighting things, clerics and wizards from spell casting, etc, with only the thief gaining xp from gp. So, the answer is a desire for more sophistication, as well as a need to make the D&D IP distinct from the original game (while still cashing in in it's fame)
>>97171701>I am a wizard, unbounded my the mere conventions>I once met a>condition, she>manI lold>>97161391I recently played a session of Shadowdark and found it incredibly refreshing. There was no setting doc, no session 0, and only two of the players knew each other before the session. We barely even rolled dice, it was just some old fashioned risk and reward.I wouldn't want to sign up to play an 80 session campaign of it. (But I'd also argue that if that is your goal at outset, you're going to have a bad time, regardless of system/mechanics).I think it went out of fashion partly because it lends itself to high mortality play and dungeon crawling as opposed to storytelling and longer character arcs with consistent, serious characters.Resurrection exists, though, but I've always disliked it.
>>97161391As someone who has had (middling) success re-introducing it at some of my tables, a lot of people are really averse to the book keeping aspect.Now, I hear you, it's only marginally different to the book keeping required for XP or Gold in general, but a lot of modern players balk even at those.This is also why so many tables end up with the party autist running a combined party purse. They knee-jerk reject the idea of tracking the little numbers.As an aside though, there is also a type of player who becomes a raging faggot about gold EVEN IF it's not tied to XP. These players become literal special needs cases in games where the gold also is spent for XP gain.I'll always have a soft spot for it, and insist that moving away from it is why so many characters have the net worth of fantasy Elon Musk. In the spirit of old adventurers (Fafhrd & The Grey Mouser, Conan, etc) it's great to have your players always come into money but never manage to keep it.Tends to make them a little hungrier for adventure, which is healthy for the table.
>>97161391Because it doesn't even work in the games that implement it.
>>97167485>"My faceless chump randomly did some stuffThose are the best kind of stories, yeah, not sure why you're being such a weirdo about this.I don't even play OSR shit either.
>>97171905>I'll always have a soft spot for it, and insist that moving away from it is why so many characters have the net worth of fantasy Elon Musk. In the spirit of old adventurers (Fafhrd & The Grey Mouser, Conan, etc) it's great to have your players always come into money but never manage to keep it.>Tends to make them a little hungrier for adventure, which is healthy for the table.I played a B/X campaign for 1½ years and we were fantasy Elon Musks by level 3 because the system gives you XP for gold recovered without any need to spend it. B/X adventures, as well ones for retroclones such as OSE also tend to give you about 10 times as much gp in treasure than ones written for 5e.They also have huge treasure chests after "boss battles", which just as well might be XP awards. For example, after the invisible minotaur battle in Night's Dark Terror, the party finds 11k gp as well as 15k in gems. For more improvised encounters, we found that XP.for-gold didn't reward the PCs not so much for ingenuity but for the DM rolling well on lair and loot tables.
>>97163662>because a keypad is infinitely easier to use.Rotary phones weren't dropped because they were "hard to use", but because they were phased out by digital technology. A rotary phone cannot press 1 for English, so people were forced to replace their rotary phones as telephone technology advanced.
>>97172078???>Treasure safely secured back home in gp = xp earnedWhat doesn't work?
>>97172295Nta but it's fixed in AD&D 1e because characters had>100gp of expenses per month (carousing, trainig, contacts, equipment maintenance, etc...)>you need to spend thousands in trainig to level up>you need to pay your henchmen
>>97169882No, it doesn't sound tense or fun at all, and you don't actually believe that. Don't lie again.
>>97169915No it shouldn't.
>>97171455No, you're just autistic and you have wrong opinions about which things are fun.
>>97171455And that's what you don't understand. Games aren't about earning things. They're not jobs.
>>97171905Why do you want to track little numbers? you some kinda queer?
>>97172249No, they obviously aren't. Not sure why you're breaking the rules by trolling.
>>97166997Saw in this context is grammatically correct.
>>97171455>If you remove those chores, eventually the game devolves to a slippery slope towards Mother may I and improv theater.Absolutely disgusting. You do understand "slippery slope" is a fallacy, right? The idea that ignoring dumb bullshit means the game will fall apart is why people can't take you grognards seriously. Why not track how many dumps you need to take while you're at it?Forcing people to focus on the mundane to make other things more interesting really just means that what you consider more interesting really is not all that great. A glowing sword is, ultimately, not really that special or exciting, and the desire to have the entire game built around making it seem special is an idiotic design choice. It's like Doom 3, a notoriously dark video game that forced players to switch between using guns OR their flashlight, just to make the flashlight and darkness that much more important, and really just lead to frustration and people creating the "duct tape mod" that attached the flashlight to a gun.Now, a sword that glows in the presence of the enemies it was forged to kill? That's actually interesting.A sword that will save you a couple copper on torches? That's only interesting if the game is otherwise a boring mess.>it will not feel real or earned. Here is the primary cope you have, and it is genuinely atrocious. You can't enjoy a game as a game. You think that intentionally making things less fun is good because it means other things will seem more fun, and that suffering through boring shit is some kind of manly challenge, and not just pure coping with the fact that you've trapped yourself into playing in a boring way because you value stupid fallacies over reasonable arguments.
>>97172994 Part2I've played strict games before, long ago when I still was wide-eyed and naive like you still somehow are. But, taking a step back and seeing how much time was wasted over nothing, and how much of the game was spent in a gambler's fallacious state of "Well, nothing interesting is happening, but something eventually might!" is where you're being taken advantage of. There are countless "tricks" that bad games use to make people keep playing them, and many RPGs shamelessly build themselves around them. The illusion of progress, the various gambling fallacies (including sunk-cost), the grind and its loops, there's entire multi-billion dollar industries built around exploiting the psychological effects these have on people, and we're supposed to have learned how to be wary of them, not to wholeheartedly embrace them and encourage ourselves to be duped by them or to dupe others with them.If a game's "progress" primarily exists as a treadmill, you're not supposed to turn a blind-eye to it just to excuse the game. If the progress is instead getting rid of annoyances the game itself introduced, that might actually be worse.If a game has little annoyances that exist just to make getting rid of them seem valuable, then do you know what you have? You have one of those annoying mobile apps that bugs you with timeouts or other pointless little annoyances solely to encourage you to pay for the premium version.If you need to trick yourself and your group into believing you're having fun when you're actually just waiting for the few moments of comparative interest amidst the tedium that comes from a poorly designed system, you're a dupe.
>>97169915>i mean if you come up with some thing like beating != killing (sneaking past, bribing, diplomacy, burning the tower down) then i do think that's lovely.This is why 3e D&D deliberately avoided saying that killing something grants EXP.
>>97172416It would be a trivial matter to make a rotary phone compatible with those, assuming it isn't already.
>>97161391>I only care about loot and all games should be nothing but loot based!!Go play a MMO fag, why the fuck are you even here?
>>97169977>There's no great challenge to tracking those mundane thingIt's not supposed to be a "challenge" because the puzzle isn't deciding how many rations to bring. It's meant to give decision making weight and consequences, which lead to natural, logical outcomes.>Your party didn't pack rations and their destination is a week away>Now you have to hunt, set traps, and take some extra time to prepare more resources to survive the journey>or you need to find another nearby town and barter with them or trade time and labor>In that time, the weather may change, monsters may roam, the sun goes down, impacting when you can travel or how dangerous it is to travel>If you're not letting players stop and take long rests every day, which they now can't without food or safe shelter, they have to carefully use their limited spell and equipment resourcesBy tracking time, resources, and making the game world a semi-realistic place where people have to eat and sleep, you introduce complications for them to deal with. By doing that, you are playing the game as it was actually intended to be played, instead of as an obtuse wargame where you just go through skirmish after skirmish, with free recharges for everything between every fight.
>>97172958Skill in games is earned by proactivity and learning how to play. Skill based games are better because of true player agency. In a game where you can not earn your victory you can not make meaningful choices. Meaningful choices and their consequences are the essential core of any roleplaying game. When earned, it feels more real and that's the goal. Having a truly believable milieu and inviting everyone to become really invested and immersed in the shared imagination land. You can't have that without at least some effort and buy in.Games are not jobs, but human personal sense of value is tied to time and energy spent on a thing. Every session in a good game makes a player more attached to his PC because of how much they have earned through this avatar. It's all illusory of course. None of it is real, but me and my players love feeling it's all real. It's better than a good book, it's about being truly free in an interactive "realistic" fantasy world that punches back if you mess around and you die if you don't eat food. If you remove mundane stuff, soon having gold doesn't mean anything, because nobody in that world really needs food as you don't track it. Basic economy is the backbone of what helps create the true sense of verisimilitude. The goal is not to track everything. The goal is to track time and hunger so the illusion of pseudo-reality is stronger.I don't care to reply anymore. Have fun with whatever theater kid stuff you're into. I just had the best session today and couldn't feel happier. My dudes destroyed the death knight's base camp and found his enormous treasure hoard. They prepared, explored the hex map, scouted the lair and found out they were under-equipped, but still used their tools ingeniously and survived the dangers. All because of their own skill and some lucky dice rolls. Everyone had a blast.
>>97173308>It's meant to give decision making weight and consequences,No, it was done without meaning.You don't really get it. In the early days of RPGs, people were not acting with brilliant insight or foresight. They were throwing shit at the wall and seeing what stuck. The idea of tying mechanics to things like rations is one of those things that seems to make sense, a clear and simple idea even a child could come up with, but after some time, let alone decades, it should be clear how unnecessary it actually is and how little it adds to the game.You don't need strict and religious tracking of mundane shit to make the world seem realistic. Hell, tying everything to simplistic mechanics would often do the exact opposite, with players more concerned about how many flavorless featureless ration portions they have in comparison to groups who take the time to figure out exactly what kind of food they are carrying.>Your party didn't pack rations and their destination is a week awayThat happens maybe once. All the time-wasting bullshit you then listed is what encourages players to then pack rations so they avoid all that shit again. Then, it's just a pointless little nag that follows them forever with no benefit to the game. And, while it seems like a minor thing to care about, add in a couple dozen extra little pointless things to keep track of and it's less of a game, less of an adventure, and more of some accountant's itinerary.>you are playing the game as it was actually intended to be playedShuuuuuuuut the fuck up. You're getting this warning ONCE. Try something like that again, and you're gonna get flogged for being a faggot.The way the game was intended to be played was not as a boring slog, and any argument that says a rule is good because it's old or because of some appeal to authority or some other fallacy is where you're going to be treated like a senile retard, waiting to die in a nursing home, who got hooked up to pure cope instead of oxygen.
>>97161391from what I gathered, fights where both easier to track and became less deadly. There's at least a perspective of encounters being more brutal in early editions. Loot and scoot is fine when combat and storylines aren't the primary draw, I'd imagine it's easier to track for kills or story events when combat's more incentivised.
>>97173662My mistake. I assumed you had a modicum of intelligence and weren't just talking out of your ass just to talk.
>>97174158Your mistake is feeling the need to make a wah-wah post after getting your ass handed to you. You were much better off just slinking away quietly instead of trying to get some ineffectual last word in just to show that you are just as dumb a bitch as you've been made out to be.
>>97174194If you'd made a single good point, you wouldn't need to shit on the chessboard and strut around like you won. You're an incredibly dense faggot who doesn't even play RPGs and it shows.
*Yawn*This fag doesn't even deserve the (you).
>>97174233>You were much better off just slinking away quietly instead of trying to get some ineffectual last word in just to show that you are just as dumb a bitch as you've been made out to be.
Pure irony.
From you, yeah.
>>97166961>Basically, modern gamers are very hard pressed to view their D&D characters as arcade game avatars. They subconsciously role play their characters with strong sense of self preservation. Why are they playing D&D? Who fucking knows.If their character dies, then they die in real life.
>>97161391Like people who prefer MP over spell slots. Video Games help push to separate Gold and XP. Changing how you level your character from buying the next level with gold to just getting the XP needed.
>>97173308That intended way to play the game is incorrect and stupid, and it has been replaced by a better intent.
>>97172993No it isn't.
>>97172994Slippery slope is not a fallacy.
>>97173099all games are loot simulators.
>>97173410No. You're playing make believe. You aren't skilled.
You know, you would think with the popularity of Soulslikes and their EXP-As-Gold gameplay that it would make a combat to some extent.
>>97177393*Comeback
>>97164053then get one at a thrift store pawn shop, online, they're practically worthless now.Dialing a number on it feels almost like a ritual with how slow and deliberate it is as for each digit you shove your finger in the hole and then drag it to the hook, then wait for the dial to return to its position for the next number.Not something you want when in a hurry or danger.
>>97171455I'm sure there are some autists that would enjoy car racing games more if they required refueling and changing the oil once in a while, but in general I don't that would have an appeal to most people
>>97176632Replaced by what? The 15 minute adventuring day and combat treadmill adventure design that people endlessly bitch about? That shit is so terrible that it made people treat a mediocre OSR-lite knockoff that suggests tracking inventory and torch time as the greatest game every made last year.
>>97169216Nice non-argument fatso
>>97169867>now imagine taking away combat XP. ever.>>b-but we killed 5 goblins!>>no sorry Timmy, XP is for quest completion.I'm in a game like this and ultimately it's fine, if you're really rabid about your XP tracking and dings it might be different, but I'm not
Gold and money are not the end-be-all of adventures anymore, so naturally a new way to earn EXP has to be obtained. If you're going to a dungeon or to rescue a princess, gold is an expected reward for your efforts, so keying character growth to it seems to make sense. Less so when you're stopping a Great Old One from breaching the walls of your plane, finding the cure to a plague, saving a party member's loved one from a kidnapper or some other challenge where piles of gold aren't expected to just show up at the end of the road. So EXP for milestones/kills/etc. arises, as it's a more versatile way to award character growth. That's not to say it's not without its weaknesses, though; the current system doesn't actually TELL YOU how or when to award EXP or for what, so it's another thing the GM just has to make up on the spot. That's a significant issue.
>>97178128>That's not to say it's not without its weaknesses, though; the current system doesn't actually TELL YOU how or when to award EXP or for what, so it's another thing the GM just has to make up on the spot. That's a significant issue.The GM makes up a lot of shit on the spot, it's not like one thing more matters
>>97178135"One more won't matter" is exactly how we end up at a the current point where the GM has to make up half the game
>>97178141Pure hyperbole, it's not like GURPS has a single concrete method for awarding character points, and yet there's a pretty substantial number of rules
>>97178147The DM doesn't have to make up a lot of stuff in GURPS in general, though.
>>97178159You'd be surprised
>>97161391I've been doing it in my campaign and I'll tell you the reason: you need gold sinks or gold becomes meaningless with the amount of XP people need to level up. It also creates kind of a narrative dissonance between people sitting on literal fortunes and staying at a tavern or something. I'd say you almost wanna look to Cyberpunk as inspiration; the same way mercs spend their eddies can work for mercenaries spending their ducats.
>>97172249>not sure why you're being such a weirdo about this.Because like pretty much every tranny that has abandoned his masculinity, he doesn't understand the concept of wanting to go *do* things for greater concepts like building a life, a home, meeting new people, traveling new worlds, and seeking that sense of fulfillment that a man uniquely gets from exploration and adventure. Instead, he wants to sit around, be affirmed that he made the right choices, and show off his "intelligence" by making quirky quips and characters centered entirely around a retarded pun they thought up.It's a shame these ugly freaks don't understand this and revert back to the men they are. They'll never understand why it feels amazing to do these "random" stuff that wound up building up an entire castle town from the ground up by your own hand, and why that matters to a man's soul. Shame.
>>97161391Xp for gold works perfectly fine... if you don't have anything to spend the gold on
>>97177072"Saw" in that context means "Witnessed", meaning society as a whole witnessed them go the way of the dodo.
>>97178029No. By more fun games that are better than yours in all ways.
>>97178539Not a real story.
>>97178850Incorrect.
>>97178539Pure schizoposting
>>97178892What does a pajeet know about speaking English? You can't even suppress your accent.
>To maintain interest and excitement, there should always be some new goal, some meaningful purpose. It must also be kept in mind that what is unearned is usually unappreciated. What is gotten cheaply is often held in contempt. It is a great responsibility to Dungeon Master a campaign."Placing Magic items", AD&D DMG, p. 93 Gary GygaxNo management of a resource the DM deems relevant should be ignored. You get what you incentivize. The game is about what behavior you reward. Little should be free, nothing should be unearned. Player skill over character skill. Enforcing encumbrance and book-keeping copper coins makes players value progression, both money and EXP more. Also arrows, rations, torches and other tools. If they are not counted, they do not feel real in the milieu and eventually it shatters the immersion and ruins the game. Ruins it because you can't shake the feeling of "We should have died back there because there is no way I had 38 arrows with me. We did not earn this victory. We were spared by the DM's pity, waiving and/or die fudging".
>>97161553OP ass-raped right in the first post
>>97179114>this fag thinks counting arrows is a skill>"I EARNED DA VICTORY!!!" he said, pulling out his dick and stroking himself, proud of all the rote addition and subtraction he kept track of, "I AM BIG BOY!"You earn victories by being clever and imaginative. You don't earn anything by doing the pointless busy-work a dimwitted DM assigns because he's so insecure that he constantly needs you to prove you're invested in the game.It's kind of sad all the shit that idiot losers do to cope with their shitty games, rather than just learning how to run/play better.
>>97178871>more funLike what, gamelet?
>>97179211This is about clever and imaginative play. Roleplaying is foremost about making meaningful choices. Choosing to delve further into the dangerous area unprepared (without weapons like when the party runs out of arrows) is a risky choice. If resources like time and arrows are not tracked, there are no meaningful choices to make and if DM also spares the party from it's own foolish decisions, players have no real agency. It's not pointless busywork. It's the concrete punch back from the milieu. Spend too much time, get ambushed by wandering monsters. Spend too many torches, now you are in the dark. No arrows? No more shooting flying foes. Should have brought more, now you are fucked. Strawman all you like. We'd have fun playing together as I could show you how it's done properly.
>>97179114Why would I care about what a retard wrote down in a gamebook?
>>97179332There's nothing clever or imaginative about the play you described, so I guess your rules are ill-suited for the goal you pretend to have.
>>97179332...are you utterly absent of creativity and imagination?>there are no meaningful choices to makeFucking hell. You're more parody than person.
>>97179211Tilting at windmills
>>97179515You seem to lack the ability to argue or even to understand how an argument works.Maybe sit out and stay quiet so you don't embarrass yourself further.
>>97179515>>97179522You're both being astounding retards. Counting arrows is not "player skill" or "pointless busywork"; it's counting fucking arrows. Inventory management and encumbrance is a game-play mechanic like any other and should be implemented, omitted or modified entirely based on the game you intend to play.There is no grand superiority to counting out individual coins and gems for their discrete values in barter unless your group loves mercantile and trading. There's nothing fucked about saying "if you don't drop them or lose them somehow you always have enough field tipped wooden arrows, please just keep track of special ammunition" if it keeps a high fantasy adventure romp going.On topic: XP for gold was a simple system built for dungeon crawls where rewards were specific and facilitated a very specific play pattern of 'go to dungeon, fight monsters, take gold, spend gold on things, go into dungeon...' etc. In the modern day we divorce the concept of wealth from progression because wealth as progression promotes degenerate reasoning if taken out of the OSR-OG DND concept of killing monsters and getting shinies.
>>97177393This mostly works because of the way the setting works. You are acquiring some kind of magical essence of the enemies you kill which you can use to either buy items or upgrade your character. It's also not quite the same as experience for gold; whether you use your souls to level up or buy an item, you only get something by spending the currency. Experience for gold is literally gaining experience just for acquiring the gold.
>>97179211>being this assblasted by the possibility of running out of anythingTTRPGs aren't for you.
>>97179561It is superior, my games are better than your games, and my dick is bigger than yours
>>97179741>being this assblasted by the possibility of playing games that are fun instead of shitTTRPGs aren't for you.
Why don't you let the players decide if they want to take the drawback of possibly losing access to one of their powers? You're in favor of decision making, according to your own posts, so this should be fine with you.
>>97179824Fun how, nogames?
>doesn't understand funno surprise there KEK
>>97179911>can't answer the question>immediately tries to do the "I'm not mad!" replyGo on, retard. Amuse us. What fun games do you play?
>>97179561It "the game they intend to play" exaggerates the importance of mundane concerns and introduces tedious bookkeeping with little payoff, they deserve to be made fun of, especially if they champion their style as the "proper" way to play.Tracking common arrows by itself isn't too much of an issue, but you're rarely going to see a game that asks to track arrows that doesn't also ask to track a half-dozen or more other tedious mundane matters that only really matter when an extremely inexperienced player fails to properly equip themselves, typically on account of the player not having knowledge their character would have. Bad rules have a way of compounding together, and then you wind up with people trying to find excuses for why the bad design is actually intentionally bad.Good rules are efficient, practical, and tend to work unnoticed, like a good butler. If players are asked to keep track of something beyond what they can keep in their own heads, then it should have a significant impact on the game, and not just be added to pretend the game has greater depth than it has.If a game had something like Fire Emblem's Weapon durability or Monster Hunter's Sharpness, where every attack depletes the weapon in some fashion, that would be somewhat realistic but also such a pain in the ass that only extreme autists would welcome such a mechanic. Most groups would just ignore it altogether or say that they sharpen their weapons whenever they have a free minute and not think much more on it.But, if a group religiously tracked every attack, and also tracked how many uses of the whetstones they carried, and then spent time and brain matter ensuring that they had a sufficient amount of whetstones despite them being both light and cheap and durable for dozens of sharpenings, AND acted like this is behavior that should be encouraged, everyone would have the right to laugh at these people and their arro- ...I mean whetstone tracking.
>>97179958>But, if a group religiously tracked every attack, and also tracked how many uses of the whetstones they carried, and then spent time and brain matter ensuring that they had a sufficient amount of whetstones despite them being both light and cheap and durable for dozens of sharpenings, AND acted like this is behavior that should be encouraged, everyone would have the right to laugh at these people and their arro- ...I mean whetstone tracking.Who the fuck is suggesting this at all? If you have 12 arrows, you shouldn't be able to fire 13 shots. This is toddler math.
>still doesn't get itLOL
>>97180001If you have a quiver, you have enough arrows. This is self-evidently the correct way to design games.
>>97180001You buy arrows individually?
>>97180004>Can't even pretend to play a game by googling some shitPathetic.>>97180010>>97180025How many arrows fit in the quiver? When was the last time you bought more? How much do arrows cost? These are things the rules as written have answers for.
>>97180055Doesn't matter, if you have a quiver you have enough arrows.
>>97180096Wrong. A quiver holds 20 arrows.
>>97180122Wrong.
>>97180055>how many-Enough, especially if you're picking up arrows and emptying enemy quivers, an easy task to do while everyone else is otherwise looting.>but-No, really, that's all that needs to be said. There's a whole slew of activities and actions that adventurers perform that don't really need much attention drawn to them.Do you clean your blades after every battle, wiping all the blood off? Do you repair your armor after every successful attack? Do you piss and shit? I bet you've never even brushed your teeth.
>>97180208If an archer has been slinging arrows every round in several battles where he doesn't have the opportunity to recover any (if the targets are some sort of fiery beasts or he's been firing from a moving vessel, for example), then it might be interesting for the DM to say something like "Your quiver is starting to feel quite light, and you were made aware earlier that you haven't been able to recover your arrows. I'm going to roll 4d4, and that's how many arrows you have left in your quiver when you next check."Or, they can just completely ignore that detail, just like they're ignoring that the fighter's unmagical sword was used on several gargoyles and it didn't even suffer a single nick. It really just depends on what kind of game the DM is trying to run, but ultimately the goal should be to present challenges and not just inconveniences, and generally an archer having to ration their arrows is an annoying inconvenience that the character would have tried to remedy ahead of time. If they know they're going to be on a ship, for example, they might opt to carry twice or more arrows than they would ordinarily.Players are not their characters, and vice versa, and characters are thinking of a lot of things that the players might not be immediately aware of. While it's good to call attention to these sorts of details as early on as possible, if every character but one steps out into sub-freezing temperatures without a heavy coat or cloak because the one player didn't write it on their character sheet, it really makes less sense for that character to just travel under-equipped than for the player to dock a few silver and write in "kick-ass cloak" as if his character had bought it as soon as he was aware of such rare and esoteric knowledge as "The air in this region can be cold."Remembering to pack mundane things is not really that interesting, and hardly a skill. Woe the group that prides themselves on that.
>>97180325Nope.
>>97180331If the players and DM trust each other, yes. If everyone is fair about it, yes.A player trying to pull a Bill&Ted where they just happen to be carrying a set of ogre-sized manacles upon encountering a BDSM-loving ogre is a step too far, but a reasonable "Since my character has been writing love letters every night, he would have a bottle of ink that I forgot to put on my character sheet. Is it okay if I squeeze that into my bag?" is hardly the place to draw a hard line of "NO, YOU'VE BEEN WRITING THOSE LETTERS IN EITHER YOUR BLOOD OR SHIT, YOUR CHOICE."
>>97180408Nope.
>>97180408Bill&Ted?
>>97180208Gameless hands typed this post.
>>97180408>I can't be expected to track arrows because what if I want to insist on something inconsequential later and the imaginary asshole I've created in my head says no?!You really are pathetic.
>>97179332>If resources like time and arrows are not tracked, there are no meaningful choices to make
>>97180501Yes.>>97180510https://youtu.be/GiynF8NQzgo?si=H3H8BdmK79UWIATmTwo guys with a time machine realize that to solve any problem, they can just remember to use the time machine later, go back in time to before the problem happened, and put some item in place that solves the problem. They first use it to break into a jail by giving themselves the keys to that jail that they'd remember to steal later on.Really bad players might try to do the same, where if they're in a situation where a specific item would be really handy, but there's no reasonable explanation for them to be carrying it, and they just will it into existence by saying they forgot to include it on their character sheet. >"Whoa, this guys a vampire? Huh... well... uh...Good thing I'm carrying 50lbs of garlic! ...It's not on my character sheet, but he'd totally have that. ...Because my character's Italian.">"Didn't you introduce your character as hating garlic and consciously trying to dismantle what you consider outdated Italian stereotypes?">"...Fuggedaboutit."
>>97180734Nope.
>>97179332Improperly, you mean.
>>97179561>if you don't drop them or lose them somehow you always have enough field tipped wooden arrows, please just keep track of special ammunitionStoryshitter "gameplay" is unacceptable
>>97172416I think there's something to be said about the speed at which you can dial something. It's a hell of a lot faster to punch in individual numbers rather...than...wait...for...the...dial...to...reset.
