2023-08-07 The nature of treasure

I should prep my game which starts in half an hour and of course I ended up discussing stuff on Discord instead.

Recently, Seba wondered about xp-for-gold and considered xp-per-session instead. My take is this: As a player, I do like the feeling of having achieved a difficult thing. Ideally, if the game has advancement, then advancement should be something that’s difficult, unlike sitting at the table, which is just the bare minimum. So if you want to avoid the mini-game of *read-the-referee’s-mind* then you need to setup up achievements ahead of time.

• If your game has clear missions, you can give XP for missions and let players decide whether the risk and reward is right for them.
• If your game has clear in-game goals that can be labelled ahead of time like hexes cleared, baronies taken, prisoners freed, allies won, then that works, too.

Just as long as it’s communicated ahead of time and leaves the means of achieving the goals open to players. In that sense, “treasure” always works. I mean, it could be clay drinking vessels, for all I care.

• If they’re hidden, I have to search.
• If they’re dispersed, I have to explore.
• If they’re heavy, I have to figure out logistics.
• If I they’re guarded, I have to fight or trick or fast-talk the guardians.

These are the important properties of treasure, I think. If you want to use something other than coins, gems and jewels, try to figure out a reward system that is at least as interesting.

Advancement just for being there is not interesting, I think.

Or have no reward system at all. Games like Classic Traveller have no advancement and they’re still fun to play, after all.

Related:

2023-05-11 The logic of accumulation

Posts by other people:

Experience Points should not fall into player’s laps à la gravity. They should be awarded with precision. And sometimes the opportunity should be taken to award them with additional intrigue. – Murder Hobos & XP: Driving Behavior

Murder Hobos & XP: Driving Behavior

​#RPG

Comments

(Please contact me if you want to remove your comment.)

⁂

An alternative would be to focus on changing gameplay. See 2012-01-24 Changing Gameplay Over Time. If the whole point is that the table wants to change the game a bit, then by all means, vote at the table: let’s all get a chance to grow or change, do it, and continue playing the game. Everything is slightly different, and yet there is continuity.

2012-01-24 Changing Gameplay Over Time

– Alex 2023-08-15 16:29 UTC

---

The problem remains tricky. There still is the question of wanting adversity in a game or not. If you do, you need to agree on managing the table such that disagreeable outcomes are possible every now and then. At that point, nothing is every easy again, I fear. 😂😭 I think this hidden somewhere in 2019-10-10 Non-adventure games? and 2019-10-11 Designing games for emotional impact.

2019-10-10 Non-adventure games?

2019-10-11 Designing games for emotional impact

– Alex 2023-08-15 16:49 UTC