Rant spoiler-ed below, because its mostly just complaining, but it feels like a lot of games lately have added 'gamified xp' to their systems, and I don't understand the appeal at all. The most positive any player I've talked to has felt about the systems are 'meh, I could take it or leave it', with most slightly disliking them.
So, mostly, I'm looking for people that like these kinds of mechanics (I have to assume they're out there if so many games feel like they're adding them), and what you is it you like about them.
But I feel like Milestone XP just makes the most sense for any traditional coop party RPG.
rant
I like trying out a bunch of different systems, and there's a lot to like, especially with a lot of the smaller games out there. I do like there 'narrative' approach ttrpgs feel like they've been taking recently, but between Chronicles of Darkness, ICON, Forged in the Dark, Apocalypse world, etc., and all there spinoff systems all having XP be earned for specific actions in game, its just a pain in the ass, that takes me out of the action.
I mostly GM, but I strongly prefer milestone XP. For some of the above games, its easy enough to gut their bespoke XP systems out of it, and just have players advance over time, but in several of them, it fucks with the overall balance, since several actions are 'bad', but made worthwhile because they earn XP.
But I don't like the feeling of interrupting game to award point, and adjudicate character advancement. And I hate systems that have players advance unevenly. There's always going to be a certain degree on uneven-ness in player attention, of rules mastery, and of spotlighting. As GM, its important to manage those so that everyone gets a chance to shine. But it just feels like increasing that workload for the GM, to need to additionally pay attention to the XP, and try to drag or XP share the players that don't find those systems engaging to not mechanically fall behind.
And as a player, I tend to have higher system mastery and attention than the others I play with, and tbh it feels bad to end up with more XP because of that. But also, it feels bad to knowingly pass up free XP by purposefully not engaging with those systems.
Really, only Call of Cthulhu and Paranoia feel like their gamified XP fits, and that's largely because the games are supposed to feel hopeless and unfair, and in the case of Paranoia, gamified and playing favorites.
I think skills are more interesting when they're a different kind of item, and finding something powerful you can't use yet is a very compelling way of encouraging players to create a new "build" or whatever
That's a fair take, and I can agree with that.
Though tbh, my preference is there to kind of be kind of two kinds of items.
'expected' items. Not every system needs this, but I think two solid examples are PF2e, and World of Darkness. In PF2e, there's solid guides on expected gold per level, and when players should have access to what tier of item, and how much they should have. Whereas in WoD, (magic) items are buyable with XP, so they're as much a part of your build as any other stat or power you buy, but with the extra interaction of: its an item. It can be passed around the party, or stolen if you're careless. In both cases, these magic items are really just additional branches of character progression that need little GM adjudication.
Plot items. These are things GM can award, or the party can work toward, and my preference for plot items is for them to be weird and outside character progression. Maybe can be represented by some kind of boon or bonus, but largely, I like to have them really be 'plot level' powers and not just like, stat or spell modifiers.
If some class or character is weak or unfun, I'd rather fix it through homebrew, than to just shower that player with 'extra' unique loot.
"expected accomplishments" yes that's a big issue and a source of gameplay story divergence where a character off doing important tasks is less powerful and prepared than everyone else
deleted by creator