Basic Fantasy RPG Forums

D&D Basic was my first RPG. I like the D&D Basic rule that gives players 1 XP for every 1 GP earned. You still get a little XP for killing monsters, but gaining gold is the main way for PCs to level in D&D Basic.

Basic Fantasy does not give XP for GP by default, though it is mentioned as an alternate rule. But it also doesn't mention lowering the XP value for monsters killed. Monsters killed in BFRPG give more XP than killing the same monsters in D&D Basic.

My question is, do games that award XP for Gold (and give very little XP for killing monsters, like in D&D Basic) play different than games that only give XP for killing monsters?

Alot of old school gamers seem to like the XP for Gold rule, as they say it makes players more cautious, encouraging fragile PCs to trick or avoid monsters rather than fighting every monster in sight in order to level up. Do you find this to be so? Do the default Basic Fantasy Rules encourage a play style that is noticeably different than the play style using the default XP for Gold rules in D&D Basic? What has been your experience with this?

Also, I've been considering using these house rules for Basic Fantasy, which gives XP for Gold while also lowering the XP value for killing monsters. Does anyone here use these alternate rules in play:

http://www.infinitedragons.com/gp-as-xp ... c-fantasy/

My players always have been kind of violent, so in my campaign I don't think it makes much difference; but for those whose players are, um, more wise than mine have been, it certainly might.

In my experience, it certainly does. I've used BFRPG to run games giving experience for various things, and when gold = xp is the rule they seem to approach things much more strategically and methodically than otherwise. Of course, in Basic Fantasy, any fight needs to be approached strategically at low levels anyway, so I guess it's not so much they're playing smarter, but they're playing less violent and sneakier when the xp is from gold.

XP primarily being from gold is from way back in the original game from 1974, and not only that but the expectation that a level 10 Fighter killing piddly low level monsters like Kobolds would get barely any xp at all compared to a level 1 character doing the same. Diminishing returns, etc. This was a game that was predicated on certain world design concepts that don't necessarily apply to later editions or retro clones, however, such as the campaign revolving entirely around a single mega dungeon that gets more dangerous the deeper it goes and which doesn't follow a particular ecology or logic aside from being "the place you go get treasure and fight baddies".

So, using those rules for xp works best in that kind of campaign, which is certainly one of many options you can use to base your Basic Fantasy campaign around, although IMO the sort of sandbox setting implied by the BF adventure anthologies works more seamlessly with these rules, as does the "beating monsters for xp" rule, which by the way does not necessarily mean killing.

I played decades ago and I’ve always run the game like the PCs are heroes in an epic. I’ve not applied XP for gold (except for the thief with 2nd Edition). I do award XP for accomplishing goals. This had put the focus on accomplishing heroic goals.

I also have an MVP award where the players vote for the most valuable player at the end of the session based on how awesome the PC and/or player was in the session. This motivates them to work as a team more.

And I also don’t divide the monster XP by the number of PCs. They get the full amount each.

I’ve basically done the same when I started running BFRPG for my groups.

Depending on your player's style gaining XP can be one of the norths in their compass, and how that XP is earned will change how the game develops, if you remove XP for battle they won't battle as much unless needed (or enjoyed by them), if you give XP for gold and treasure their may become more treasure hunters than anything else.