Spending or saving Hero Points

[simon_hibbs]

Hello,

Simon and Mike, aren't all of those claims and implications a function of how much adversity the characters face?

That's true, but the proposed system doesn't allow for taking the degree of adversity into account. By making bumps essentialy free, you're going to see them being used no matter what is happening in the game because there's no tradeoff.

So it seems to me as if finding a given group's sweet spot for (a) how many Hero Points to receive per session, (b) how many to spend on bumping during a typical session, (c) and how fast abilities' values get increased ...

... is something that a given group is going to arrive at for themselves.

Under the standard HQ system yes, but under the proposed system no. The number of points spent on bumps in a typical session will approach the number of HPs awarded, regardless of the degree of adversity, because there's little or no reason to preserve them.


Simon Hibbs

[Mike Holmes]

I think he's talking about the number of HP distributed vs. the number of times that you roll for things, Simon. That is, if you formerly gave out ^ HP per character per session, then giving out 3 HP with the new system will result in the same number of overall Bumps and Improvements. At most. The point being that, in practice, the number of HP given, despite the system will tend to become "correct"

Or, rather, you say that you now give out X HP, and that if you continued to do so that you'd get too many Bumps. My guess is that you'd just then give out fewer HP to compensate.

Mike

[simon_hibbs]

Or, rather, you say that you now give out X HP, and that if you continued to do so that you'd get too many Bumps. My guess is that you'd just then give out fewer HP to compensate.

And screw the players on advancement? To fix that I'd need to give out advancement-only, non-bumping HPs and we're back to square one.

Simon Hibbs

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

Simon, either you're not seeing my point, or you don't like it anyway, so feel free to ignore it. We're not talking about the One True Way to play the game.

Best,
Ron

[lightcastle]

Just curious, but what do you think of something like the way the Buffy game handles their Drama points?  You only gain experience, not Drama points, but you can spend XP to buy Drama points between adventures.  

It's still a trade off, but it seems to feel different because the player is making the choice at a different time.

[buserian]

Just curious, but what do you think of something like the way the Buffy game handles their Drama points?  You only gain experience, not Drama points, but you can spend XP to buy Drama points between adventures.  

It's still a trade off, but it seems to feel different because the player is making the choice at a different time.

Other than that there is little point to it (since the cost would, I assume, be 1:1), it seems a good way to do it. And I mean "little point" mechanically, NOT in terms of it being a valid idea.

I think, however, that the key to the way HQ does it is that players do have the choice when they use HP of having to give up future advancements by using the point now.

buserian

[Mike Holmes]

I think, however, that the key to the way HQ does it is that players do have the choice when they use HP of having to give up future advancements by using the point now.

Yeah, I can't get past how key that is in actual play. It means that every HP spent has a meaning in terms of passed up opprotunities, and each not spent is the player allowing themselves to get hosed.

If losing were a problem in HQ, I'd have a different opinion. But since losing in HQ is so much fun, it's all copacetic.

Mike

[lightcastle]

Yeah, I can't get past how key that is in actual play. It means that every HP spent has a meaning in terms of passed up opprotunities, and each not spent is the player allowing themselves to get hosed.

If losing were a problem in HQ, I'd have a different opinion. But since losing in HQ is so much fun, it's all copacetic.

Interesting. That makes a lot of sense.