Winning

My ongoing House of Worms Empire of the Petal Throne campaign continues to barrel along, even after nearly nine and a half years of weekly play. You may recall from a few recent posts that the characters are currently traveling through the land of Salarvyá as part of a lengthy overland trek to explore the ruins of the nonhuman Mihálli. Though their reasons for doing so are ultimately personal – attempting to understand the magical diagrams found in the Almanac of Wába – their expedition is under the patronage of Prince Rereshqála, eldest son of the emperor and a potential heir to the Petal Throne. Consequently, their travels have been filled with many unexpected twists and turns, as political machinations, religious conflict, violent rebellions, and petty rivalries have intruded on their lives. 

These intrusions have made for fun and exciting sessions – but very little experience points. As I've explained before, EPT is, rules-wise at least, a variant of original Dungeons & Dragons. Like OD&D, experience points are given for only two things: enemies defeated and treasure. Since most of our sessions include neither combat nor the looting of the underworld, there are thus very few opportunities for the characters to acquire XP. The has been the norm in the campaign for many years now, with weeks or even months passing between occasions when I award experience points to any character. On those rare occasions when I do, the amounts are usually small, so small, in fact, that they scarcely make a dent in the vast numbers of XP needed by every character to attain a new level.

Players accustomed to the pace of advancement common in other games, including Dungeons & Dragons, might see this as a problem, but I assure you it hasn't been. The reason why is quite simple: in the House of Worms campaign, advancement is not solely measured by gaining new levels. This might seem peculiar, especially in a game whose rules are so closely modeled on those of D&D, but it actually makes sense in play. Advancement in this campaign is measured by other, in-game rewards, such as status, position, and influence, not to mention knowledge. These are the things that matter to the characters and allow them to have a greater impact on the world of the campaign. 

Allow me to offer a couple of examples. The titular House of Worms clan is a small one found only in the city of Sokátis and the region immediately nearby. It's respectably medium-ranked, with commercial interests in winemaking and minor ties to the Temples of Sárku and Durritlámish. For good and for ill, no one outside of Sokátis (nor many within the city, for that matter) paid much attention to it – that is, until the player characters started their adventures. Over the years of play, their efforts have brought them and their clan to the direct attention of two imperial princes (and the indirect attention of two more), helped forge a beneficial alliance with an ancient aristocratic clan, expand the markets for their wines, and establish a new branch of the clan in another city. 

The player characters themselves have also enjoyed personal successes. Aíthfo rose from a rootless adventurer to governor of an imperial colony. Grujúng became a respected elder and clanmaster, as well as the general of a frontier legion. Keléno rose within the scholarly hierarchy of his temple, acquiring both greater command of sorcery and not one but three wives in the process. Nebússa, too, married the niece of the Disposer of Mekú and rising within the secretive Omnipotent Azure Legion. I could similarly list the accomplishments of Znayáshu, Chiyé, Kirktá, and Qurén, but I hope I've made my point.

None of the foregoing accomplishments are remotely connected to experience points and only a small number (e.g. Keléno's sorcery) have anything to do with game mechanics. Yet each and every one of these accomplishments is not just important to the development of the campaign as a "living" place where actions have consequences, but also to the development of the characters, as they become more fully realized within the setting. RPGs are often described as games in which there are "no winners or losers," but that's not really true, is it? Players whose choices in the game result in better outcomes for their characters, whether that means more XP/levels or more status/position/influence within the campaign setting are, on some level, winning, are they not?

I don't want to make too much of this, because it's not my main point. At the same time, I think we're often too quick to dismiss the idea that all RPGs have measures of success. Those measures may vary from game to game and sometimes even campaign to campaign, but they do exist. In the House of Worms campaign, success is measured just as much – if not more – by how powerful and influential the characters have become within the setting as by their experience point totals. Likewise, in my Barrett's Raiders Twilight: 2000 campaign, success is measured at present by survival against the harsh conditions of post-WWIII Poland and, ultimately, by returning safely to NATO lines. That's what "winning" looks like in this context.

Mind you, I also think winning consists in maintaining a long campaign, so what do I know?