Experience Gain in nWoD 2.0 - An analysis and shit

Sunny

@Sunny said:

@Derp said:

@Sunny said:

To keep the game at a power level that fits with the campaign that I will be running while still allowing a very generous number of ways to earn experience.

This is not going to do what you think it's going to do.

Yes, it actually is.

Alright, then. If this is the intended goal, then I have to think you're just bad at game design, and shall choose not to play there.

Everyone wins, then.

How in the world do you figure this? Your methodology relies on the idea that characters who hit a certain amount of xp 'level up' in some fashion.

No, it doesn't. Even a little bit.

A character that has 200xp invested in Contacts and Retainers is in a world different place than a character that has 200xp dedicated to fighting styles and combat skills.

This is correct. But a 200 XP contacts and retainers character is vastly different than a 400 XP contacts and retainers character. I'm not sure how you seem to be missing this distinction. I can see how you can make the case that experience isn't the only measure of a character's power level -- build matters -- but to say that the number of experienced involved has nothing to do with it is absurd. Seriously. The premise you seem to be working with is ridiculous.

It just doesn't work that way, and you're treating the system as if it does, which is at best naive and at worst shortsighted.

No, I'm not treating the system as if it does. What I am doing is making experience easy to earn while still placing an upper limit so that power level doesn't grow ridiculously out of control.

Experience level does not relate to power level.

This is incorrect.

See above.

Man. 5 is less than 10. Seriously.

This is how tabletop works.

And you think that's it's not going to work that way in a MU?

No, I'm saying that it's not actually a major problem. It happens all the time in tabletop, where earning 100 XP in one year (presuming a monthly game) would be a ridiculous thought at all. People will have to actually make choices about what is important for their character, and what direction they take it. This is not actually a bad thing.

That the two are so magically different that something you would see in one can't happen in the other? Are you new here?

Are you just stupid? My point was that it happens in tabletop and it's not the end of the world. I literally said the opposite of what you're claiming here. Put down the crack, son.

If you're not looking for equality, then what the hell is the point of your xp cap?

Limiting the upper level of power.

Again, going back to the first statement, not only does this not do what you think it's going to do,

How does it not limit the upper level of power?

I'm not even sure that you're aware of what you want it to do in the first place, given that your premises contradict each other.

No, your premises contradict one another. You're off on the moon talking about equality; I'm over here talking about the upper limit.

WoD is not World of Warcraft.

No, but it is an online game that has lots of people trying to play in a shared world.

If that's the way you want it to work, try the D20 World of Darkness, Monte Cook's version. This is going to solve a lot of your issues.

No, it sounds like it would solve a lot of your issues, though.

Thenomain

@Sunny said:

@Thenomain said:

I can't think of a single RPG that has both XP as a limiter at both ends of the stat. Curtail, guide, discourage, but never cutting you off from your own character sheet.

Any MMORPG on the internet.

What? If I get the XP, I'm not barred from doing things at that level of the XP on any MMO I've ever played. Mind you, those are limited to World of Warcraft, City of Heroes, and Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic.

Although, since you're starting to post quite a lot like this:

@Sunny said:

@Derp said:

@Sunny said:

To keep the game at a power level that fits with the campaign that I will be running while still allowing a very generous number of ways to earn experience.

This is not going to do what you think it's going to do.

Yes, it actually is.

... then you might want to stop posting. The yuh-huh/nuh-uh thing is just about as useful as it sounds.

To quote an earlier post:

@Sunny said:

I don't think going into it in depth here is helpful to anyone [...] I'm prone to rambling [...]

Take this wise man's advice.

ThatOneDude

@Derp

@Derp said:

@ThatOneDude said:

Do people still RP on Eldritch? Let me qualify that with - New player shows up and has opportunities to play with people? Old people return and they can to?

Addendum: Would I have to always play with Derp and would he always play like Chance from TR?4

People still play plenty on Eldritch. Nobody wants to play with you, though, because you have this allergy to subtlety and can't seem to avoid being an asshole to everyone you come into contact with. Kind of like every iteration of the Cade characters you make. So I expect that your experience will be largely poor wherever you go, and you're one to talk about always playing the same sorts.

But lo, I see that you're still approved and taking up a demon spot while contributing nothing. So bitch on, little rager. Bitch on.

I'll edit this and be constructive in the response. Demon jobs that take 30 days to close for XP spends didn't lead to a great experience. Asking demon specific questions that don't get answered or ignored in jobs didn't lead to a good experience. A lack of Demon side plot, which myself and crew could make but seemed like a waste do to the job situation didn't lead to a fun experience. So, instead of complaining to a deaf ear that didn't care I took a break and log in from time to time to check on my PC and to see if things change... Or ask here.

As for Cade and him being an asshole we'll have to agree to disagree. IC vs OOC is different and I can only think of one place where anyone could think Cade is an asshole. Myself and the other party seem to agree there was no OOC beef so other than that I think you'll need to come with specifics. If I was a problem player on the mu* I'd assume there were complaints from other players or staff but I have yet to hear of those...

But if that is your official staff stance based on the past and you getting fucked up here then you are close to a Spider 2.0 and I'm glad to see it come out.

I stand by to listen to your crew defend your honor but all I need is a... Chance...

Derp

@ThatOneDude said:

I'll edit this and be constructive in the response. Demon jobs that take 30 days to close for XP spends didn't lead to a great experience. Asking demon specific questions that don't get answered or ignored in jobs didn't lead to a good experience. A lack of Demon side plot, which myself and crew could make but seemed like a waste do to the job situation didn't lead to a fun experience. So, instead of complaining to a deaf ear that didn't care I took a break and log in from time to time to check on my PC and to see if things change... Or ask here.

Have you tried, I dunno, putting in a job to check on those sorts of things? Because Demon jobs -are- getting answered. There are some things where an answer takes longer than others because I have to ask for information, get permission to do things, collaborate with other people. You know, the whole usual staff dance thing. But on the whole, anything that doesn't involve 'we want to do something that requires massive amounts of bookkeeping and staff handholding to the point of needing our own personal storyteller to keep up with this endeavor' get answered fairly promptly.

As for Cade and him being an asshole we'll have to agree to disagree. IC vs OOC is different and I can only think of one place where anyone could think Cade is an asshole. Myself and the other party seem to agree there was no OOC beef so other than that I think you'll need to come with specifics. If I was a problem player on the mu* I'd assume there were complaints from other players or staff but I have yet to hear of those...

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

But if that is your official staff stance based on the past and you getting fucked up here then you are close to a Spider 2.0 and I'm glad to see it come out.

My opinion of you is not my official staff anything. Your jobs, should they actually exist, get processed in just as timely a manner as everyone else's, and with equal degrees of fairness. Just because I personally think you're a prick doesn't mean I can't do my job. But by all means, compare me to Spider. I mean, you're reaching, and badly, but it's funny to watch you scramble for anything.

I stand by to listen to your crew defend your honor but all I need is a... Chance...

And suddenly I'm reminded of the time when an entire fucking channel told you and your partner to GTFO because, lo, you had already pissed off over half the sphere you were in a week out of chargen. Those were good times.

Arkandel

For what it's worth, Demon on Eldritch seemed really dead. I gave it a shot for a couple of weeks - I had one offer for RP, the channel was really quiet, no one was running plot and there was little integration with other spheres. Perhaps oddly enough Stigmatics seemed to find it easier to get going than actual Demons did.

My experience compared to Werewolf was that it was really dead out there.

... What does any of this have to do with experience gains in nWoD 2.0 though?

ThatOneDude

@Derp said:

@ThatOneDude said:

I'll edit this and be constructive in the response. Demon jobs that take 30 days to close for XP spends didn't lead to a great experience. Asking demon specific questions that don't get answered or ignored in jobs didn't lead to a good experience. A lack of Demon side plot, which myself and crew could make but seemed like a waste do to the job situation didn't lead to a fun experience. So, instead of complaining to a deaf ear that didn't care I took a break and log in from time to time to check on my PC and to see if things change... Or ask here.

Have you tried, I dunno, putting in a job to check on those sorts of things? Because Demon jobs -are- getting answered. There are some things where an answer takes longer than others because I have to ask for information, get permission to do things, collaborate with other people. You know, the whole usual staff dance thing. But on the whole, anything that doesn't involve 'we want to do something that requires massive amounts of bookkeeping and staff handholding to the point of needing our own personal storyteller to keep up with this endeavor' get answered fairly promptly.

As for Cade and him being an asshole we'll have to agree to disagree. IC vs OOC is different and I can only think of one place where anyone could think Cade is an asshole. Myself and the other party seem to agree there was no OOC beef so other than that I think you'll need to come with specifics. If I was a problem player on the mu* I'd assume there were complaints from other players or staff but I have yet to hear of those...

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

But if that is your official staff stance based on the past and you getting fucked up here then you are close to a Spider 2.0 and I'm glad to see it come out.

My opinion of you is not my official staff anything. Your jobs, should they actually exist, get processed in just as timely a manner as everyone else's, and with equal degrees of fairness. Just because I personally think you're a prick doesn't mean I can't do my job. But by all means, compare me to Spider. I mean, you're reaching, and badly, but it's funny to watch you scramble for anything.

I stand by to listen to your crew defend your honor but all I need is a... Chance...

And suddenly I'm reminded of the time when an entire fucking channel told you and your partner to GTFO because, lo, you had already pissed off over half the sphere you were in a week out of chargen. Those were good times.

First I'll start off saying my heart hurts at your witty responses, but... I won't make you reach for any more unfounded accusations. As you know the situation with Chance and Cade was hashed out on this very forum earlier and I think everyone will agree that whatever the outcome, it is done. From my reading it would appear you were the victim and I was the aggressor. Oh wait, no that's not how it played out but no need to rehash. As for asking me to leave channel that was not the whole channel, playback the tape please.

Second we should move this to another thread that we can call: Sinister, is he the Spider 2? Or is that dude really still talking about how he was an asshole on TR and blaming it on Cade? Or maybe something along the lines of: Dude, if someone points out potential problems in a game or asks honest questions, act like a fucking adult.

Third. The question about activity and playing on Eldritch was based on conversations had elsemu* talking about activity across games in general. Two or more random people replied that they logged in and didn't see anything going on and didn't get the vibe that new characters were possible or that creating a character was worth it. So... Go ahead and keep lobbing shit with no backing no understanding and with the same skill in which I fear you do most of the nonsense you do in your life as a whole.

I wish, for just once someone that could make a difference in a game would do it just to make the game better as a whole for players. Not for pride or because they can get more hot TS with the ladies/dudes or whatever.

Demon jobs I referred to didn't just include my own and at no time did I mean to say I believed it was for any reason other than incompetence or a lack of fucks in answering them. Them being my jobs had and has no part in it as my first step was to ask my peers if their jobs were handled in such a fashion which they were.

Now... Are things different? on the game? I wouldn't know because if I ask in this format I get "Cause you are an asshole".

I asked in channel last night and it doesn't appear much has changed. Or that I'm perceived as an asshole IC or OOC from those that have been playing. But maybe I'm such an asshole they fear answering with the truth because of the repercussions I can drop on them <sarcasm>.

Lastly...
link text

Derp

Then by all means, move it to another forum. I will address your ranting there, rather than muck up this thread more.

tragedyjones

Back to the topic of xp spends I wonder if @Sunny is making the same mistake I did with CoFaB. Namely, being so against the xp bloat and dinosaurs of TR that you overcorrect.

Coin

There is no "perfect system". i also don't believe that @Sunny is "bad at design" because of the system she chose to enforce what she wants. It's just a different desire. I've played in places where I disagreed with the policy even more than I do this one, so it's no big for me, and it really shouldn't be for anyone else. Just her (and whomever is actually putting effort into it with her). If they want it to. If they don't, that's good, too.

tragedyjones

Game designers should do what they fucking want to, yeah. They are beholden to their own truth. Fuck the haters.

Saulot

@tragedyjones said:

Back to the topic of xp spends I wonder if @Sunny is making the same mistake I did with CoFaB. Namely, being so against the xp bloat and dinosaurs of TR that you overcorrect.

This appears to be an issue with damn near every nwod mush that's come out in the last 2 years.

tragedyjones

Not wanting to be the reach is a legitimate goal. When it paralyzes you with fear or obsession like it did me in 2012, it is a problem.

Arkandel

Generally speaking (as it goes well beyond the scope of XP), overtuning systems to prevent abuse so that the majority is burdened with enforcement meant to prevent abuse by a much smaller minority is a poor choice; it both inconveniences everyone and doesn't stop what it was meant to.

Such things are nearly always lose/lose propositions.

Sunny

@Arkandel

I agree entirely with not making rules to punish the many for the deeds of the few, but this has nothing to do with abuse. At all. It's related to an adaptation for online play, as well as (the big one) the desire to keep the campaign lower powered.

@tragedyjones
If it were rooted in 'I don't want to be like that' instead of 'I want to be like this', I'd be concerned about it being reactionary, as well.

Has seriously no one ever played in an experience limited campaign in tabletop?

Misadventure

I've played Champions, where a weeks play got you 1 xp. For scale, +1 on a 3d6 systrm was 2 pts, but a completely new power could cost between 20 and 80 points easily. That was LIKE a no xp gain campaign.

Arkandel

@Sunny said:

Has seriously no one ever played in an experience limited campaign in tabletop?

Have? Sure. Preferred it? Nope.

I mean anyone can run the thing they envision and that's perfectly fine with me, but I like stories where my character grows in power, influence or skills. I like the theorycrafting, figuring out stats, making choices between what I can buy with XP. That carrot - I wannit.

Other people might not. More power to them.

Thenomain

@Sunny said:

Has seriously no one ever played in an experience limited campaign in tabletop?

Though you don't answer your own question, I'll still take it that you have?

I'll answer this question in a slightly different way: I have never, outside of Mu*s, been sitting on XP that I thought was useless for my character. I have never had a GM tell me that I couldn't level, that I couldn't spend XP. I have had and followed occasionally the advice many skill-games give that you can't spend it on a stat that you haven't been using, as a way to give the GM control over saying "no" when someone wanted to buy a lot of melee when all they've been using in combat is guns.

The best GM I've ever had ran most of our AD&D2 campaigns, of which I sat through two over the course of five-ish years. For the second one, he said, "Okay, for this game I'll be giving out less XP but more rewards." He was tired of the system and tweaked it for us. It was an entirely different campaign, and I know he was the best GM I've ever seen because it did not for one instant feel like a grind. We were spoiled with things to do.

But there's one, and in the end I think the only important thing, that makes a Tabletop different from a Mu*: Control. Who controls what and at what level. On a Mu*, you don't have someone keeping an eye out for pacing and involvement, and therefore XP really isn't as reflective of what's going on.

(You didn't think that I could bring this back to the topic, did you?)

Eldritch uses the 2xp/week auto-award setup that I have wanted to try for years, but as we've seen from the examples here it may not be reactive enough to what's going on in the game. This is, I admit, the first time I've seen people complain that they're getting power without doing anything for it. For me, this validates one of my favorite play styles and I'm glad to see it as a pattern. For everyone else, this is pretty interesting feedback.

Which brings me back to the question asked: Yes, I have played in an experience-limited game, and even designed one that was meant to be more experience-limited, but I don't think that's an interesting answer. I don't think it gets us anywhere in thinking about what XP is and does, and what works and what doesn't.

In this entire thread I'm most interested in RfK's approach, which sounds like a mix of being rewarded for logging in and separately rewarded for doing things. I don't think I've seen a system that determines "are you logged in and also doing things" that has made me comfortable that this is actually what it's doing.

tragedyjones

The only time I have had any sort of xp spending rules imposed in tabletops are when the game itself has it built in, usually for training times.

Saulot

@Sunny said:

Has seriously no one ever played in an experience limited campaign in tabletop?

I have, but you are also proposing a throttle on progress, not just gains. On the online games I've played on with limits on gains/spends hasn't really appeared to limit power level or twinking. Especially when your powers are grab bags like werewolf or demon, and aren't too limited by getting to x level in a given metric. The end result I see is similar to what @arkandel and @derp said. It usually punishes those not well versed in a given system, and doesn't do much of anything to people that know what they're doing.

Arkandel

@Thenomain said:

In this entire thread I'm most interested in RfK's approach, which sounds like a mix of being rewarded for logging in and separately rewarded for doing things. I don't think I've seen a system that determines "are you logged in and also doing things" that has made me comfortable that this is actually what it's doing.

It might not be what you're referring to but one of the questions I think we should ask here is whether it's important that a system both know a player is active and that their character is growing based on what they're doing. That is, if that is the solution, what problem does it solve?

For instance I might want to play a professional boxer but have no interest in having scenes around him sparring, working out, having actual fights... I want to have that stuff in the background, and yet still have a sheet which reflects the IC skills I think he'll have. Is that 'wrong'? Should the system make me work for those things in particular rather than play what is dependent on having the, yet without being them?

Sometimes system designers seek more control that's needed or suitable. Trust but verify.