I'm thinking of a shared XP & cash system for a 3-player RPG (it's nearly finished) but I haven't played many RPG's so I want to get SEN's opinions.
Advantages - Stops players from arguing over last hits.
- Keeps players fairly balanced.
- Players can choose individual roles (such as support, tank).
Disadvantages- Players can leech off each other's hard earned XP & cash rewards.
- Out-levelling other players can be fun and competitive.
So here's the options:
1. No shared XP / cash.
2. Optional shared XP / gold (player vote / host's decision at game start).
3. Shared XP only (no shared cash).
Also ... does anyone know how to create a votebox?
None.
I think the answer to whether you should implement it is simply:
Is it a cooperative RPG?
None.
If it is a completely even distribution, you can have a set pot of XP/ Gold and split it depending on the amount of players.
3 Players = 1/3 the pot
2 Players = 1/2 the pot
1 Player = All for
meeee Alternatively, you can make it so your ally's kills net you a small consolation reward of XP/ Gold.
So everyone gets a little, but making the kill yourself reels in the big bucks.
None.
Yeah it's cooperative! Now that I think about it, shared XP & gold makes sense. It balances out the game.
If it is a completely even distribution, you can have a set pot of XP/ Gold and split it depending on the amount of players.
3 Players = 1/3 the pot
2 Players = 1/2 the pot
1 Player = All for meeee
Alternatively, you can make it so your ally's kills net you a small consolation reward of XP/ Gold.
So everyone gets a little, but making the kill yourself reels in the big bucks.
Yeah, that's a good idea. I think I'll go with the first option, distribute it evenly on the condition that allies are nearby when you make the kill.
None.
I like the idea of completely shared money, but in practice it doesn't work so well because people can't comprehend that and you have people who blow all the party's cash on silly upgrades.
With 3 people, the shared mineral/gas route would be much easier to do and control.
"Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Chairman - do we have to call the Gentleman a gentleman if he's not one?"