[OSR] Gold as XP (1/3) - Theory

"Gold chains in tiny wooden chest" by Marco Verch

Background

The “Gold as XP” was my biggest WTF in AD&D, when I discovered it about 20 years ago.
It was for me an aspect of the meta that I completely rejected. I hated levels back then, because a level based progression was not logical in my eyes (a leap in power every 3-4 scenarios? I preferred a little step after each adventure, like in skill based systems)
Levels were not logical, and getting a level because you accumulated money felt like complete nonsense...

Developments

Lately, as I reflected more and more upon the tropes of D&D (OSR and 5E brought back D&D in my life), and accepted them as they were, I tended to analyse (or read analysis of) the meta behind the game design. Then did “Gold as XP” only start to make sense.

Function

It is a very simple tool to emulate a "rag to riches"-campaign that focuses not only on monster-slaying for advancement. Why? Because killing the Monster™ is suddenly optional to get XP. Stealing their loot, tricking them into giving you their riches, parleying for a part of their treasure, all these options are suddenly as valid as killing them. They are also less risky, but on another meta-roleplaying-level also much more interesting. It’s even stated clearly like that in the mythical Redbox’s player’s book: ‘Did you notice that you get a lot of experience for treasure, and not much for killing monsters? It's better to avoid killing, if you can, by tricking monsters or using magic to calm them down. You can sometimes avoid the risks of combat.But you will have to fight many monsters to get their treasures’ (Mentzner: 1983, p. 12).

This was my first realisation that this “Gold as XP” rule was not as stupid as I thought: it was never meant as a tool to explain level advancement, but as a tool to create a certain atmosphere at the table.
My next realisation was that “Gold as XP” doesn't mean you have to give XP when you award treasure, you can award XP for spending gold instead.
Which sounds much more logical to me, but also for some tweaks in the atmosphere at the table, with only a simple few coefficients between what gold is spent on and the XP awarded.
a few examples:

• You want a sword'n'sorcery kind of game? Make a coeficient x2 on Carousing (which is a political neutral way of saying "Sex, drugs, and rock'n'roll"). You'll have feasts that would attract Conan, Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser...
• You want to emphasize empire building in your game? Make a coefficient x1.5 on building costs, x3 on buying titles (some societies would make you a baron, if you were ready to pay the price), and x2 on armies, followers, hirelings and torchbearers. As soon as they can afford one, your players will hire some swordbearers and start a company...
• You want an arthurian kind of game? Make a coefficient x2 on religious offerings, bathes and x4 on money patroning for the arts (or spent on creating works of art), and maybe 1.5 on horses and other materials for joust.

I want to test it! How exactly does it work?

I decided to test this mechanic in its own setting, using D&D 5E as a basis (OSR is very attractive, but 5E attracts more players).
Examining the experience table from 5E for an "XP=Gold" campaign, i realised that it works with my vision of a medieval-fantasy world.
If a poor person lifestyle’s costs 14 silver per week, we can imagine them making 15 silver a week (money was tight for poor people in the middle ages), reaching 300 spent gold pieces would mean 200 weeks of labour to get to lvl 2 - nearly 4 years. Without adventuring.
(On the other hand, D&D3, with a 1000 XP necessary for lvl 2 would not work for me - unless using a silver-base for XP, as used in Lamentations of the Flame Princess [LotFP])

Using the “downtime rules” from Xanatar’s guide to everything, working can bring up to 25 gold per week (you’d have to be VERY lucky though) it would mean 12 weeks (3 months) of work to reach lvl 2, but it is very unlikely to happen.

Crime and Pitfighting are much more lucrative, but more dangerous. Still, a very lucky and ambitious thief could reach lvl 3 within one week, and a pit fighter lvl 2 within two weeks.
The other “money making”-activities described there are somehow on the same level.

Should “downtime activities” then be banned? Well by no means, but their gains shouldn’t be taken into account for determining XP.
LotFP does this very explicitly, and goes even further, restricting the gold affecting XP gain to the Treasure found during the adventure. Loot selling? Pickpocketing? Quest rewards or salaries? These will make you wealthy, but not experienced.(Raggi, James Edward IV. "Lamentations of the Flame Princess - player core book: Rules & Magic." (p. 33-34))

This is a very good rule of thumb and a perfect way for the DM to “control” the flow of XP… At least under the assumption that the XP gained is equal to the amount of gold you bring “back to town”.

I decided that I want another assumption for my campaign: "XP=Gold spent"(and it might well be an error and unmanageable, since it needs to be tested: I could not find a source using this method yet…).
Which means i’d have to find a way to not reward “solo-play” actions, particularly from a rogue or bard (the petty thieving and gambling that a lot of young/beginner players seem to always want to try is an example of what I mean here). Luckily, 5E has a tool for this: the aforementioned downtime activities.
These are explicitly for a time outside adventures (this again is an excellent and subtle game-design answer to a recurring problem that 5E mastered).

Implementation?

I will implement a system of coefficients for spent gold that will affect the amount of XP gained for these expenses. This will be discussed in the 2nd part of this article “[OSR] Gold as XP (2/2) - Praxis”.

Just for fun

To conclude with a funnier tone, the devious and sadistic DM in me really wants to give around 275 Gold per player as a reward for their first adventure and watch them divide their treasure… Will one player sacrifice himself so that the others might all get their level 2? Will they all stay level 1? Will they choose one or two of them that will reach level 2 and the others will get their level the next time? Metagame meets sadistic DM at its best.

As always, if you disagree with anything, of find anything useful, start a conversation in the comments. I approve non-spam messages quite quickly :)