My group's motivations & rewards

[Matt Snyder]

Clinton posted an excellent thread in GNS Model Discussion about rewards (among other good points). I was going to reply there, but realized this is a thread that's been incubating for a while -- after all, I promised Ron I would explain in more detail some soul searching my group's been doing lately.

I've really taken the idea that rewards define game play to heart. Here's my sob story -- I'll get to rewards eventually . . .

My long-standing group, to which I've referred many times here on the board as "traditional" because we play D&D almost exclusively, has been playing 3E since it's launch. Obviously, the excitement and newness has worn off, and in its place I find myself languishing as a GM. For weeks, even months, I've been trying to assess the problem and alter my style to make the game more enjoyable for everyone. I had a little success, but something more drastic was needed.

So, over the last couple weeks, I've gathered my meager group of old friends (and even family -- one brother) to discuss some of the most fundamental issues about our favorite pastime. I shared with them several reasons I thought our sessions were poorly run, and I explained several specific aspects of D&D 3E that I think don't suit our group well at all. To my slight surprise, they agreed with much of what I had to say, particularly with many specific criticisms of the game's rules and with a few of our "group style" issues.

The next step was getting everyone to define -- out loud and in the presence of everyone else -- their main motivation for playing RPGs. Here's how it broke down (and a slight waring -- I'm aware that these "reasons" might be viewed by Forge folks as too vague, but I knew at every turn what my players meant -- I'm not interested in getting them up to speed on GNS terminology and common mistakes, etc. I'm interested in making some progress in making our session more enjoyable):

My goal: Exploration of Situation (I think!?!)
I defined my main motivation as the urge to create a shared mythology. By that, I guess I meant creating a shared, meaningful story (yes, I realize the pitfalls of the term) to which everyone

Interesting note: I suggested everyone come up with intangibles -- mine was to extend what I called "control of the scene" to the players. Basically, I was encouraging them to narrate the scene when relevant to their characters. What's more, is that I'll reward colorful, dramatic description at the end of the night, hopefully encouraging them to do this.

The rest of the group . . .

Willard's goal: Exploration of Situation
'Slick' Willie described his motivation as wanting to create memorable stories, and therefore I think he's very much on the same path that I am.

Interesting note: He also noted that he wanted to craft better, imaginative game-play that let his mind's eye picture the scene, rather than let grids, maps and miniatures (or counters) paint the scene for him, which I thought was very interesting for him to say.

Flash's goal: Exploration of Character
After I warned him that EVERYONE's motivation was to 1) have fun and 2) be with friends, he got more speicific. For him, the hobby is most rewarding when he can do what he calls "character building." By that, he meant to things. First, he wants to create meaningful, interesting and rich characters. Second (and, he noted, equally important) was to promote that character  -- i.e. character advancement, whether it be levels, XP like in Storyteller (which he plays frequently), etc.

An interesting note -- Flash is what I call a character fanatic. That is, once he creates a character concept, he can't let go. He becomes so devoted to the character that it's very difficult for him to change "campaigns" or especially games (he's been known to request using his exact character from one campaign in whatever new one comes along).

Obviously, this has it's good and bad points. It's good because he cares about his character, what his relation is to the narrative threads and other PCs. He usually gives me a lot to work with as GM. His "character fanaticism is bad because he loses sight of the larger picture. For example, right now he LOVES the campaign we're playing, while the rest of us are ready to move on, I think (more on that later).

Dave's goal: Exploration of Character
Dave suggested goals similar to Flash's. He said his main interest was "character establishment," by which he meant creation of a role. He's a great "actor" player, very much getting into his role (to his fellow's delight, usually). Unlike Flash, Dave said character advancement, in terms of rules, was nearly irrelevant, so long as he could maintain the character's identity / enjoy the role.

Once we had all established and shared our goals, we agreed our goals are largely compatible, if not complimentary in some areas. Certainly, there is some dissonance, but altering the make-up of the group to avoid that isn't going to happen. We'll deal with it! Also, note that while I highlighted Flash's devotion to character advancement and Dave's "apathy" toward it, that's probably a bit misleading. Everyone, myself included, agreed that we enjoyed character advancement, and that would remain very much a part of our sessions. I commented to everyone, however, that I thought our recent sessions became fixated on the progression itself (talking about feats or skills, rolling hit points to cheers and jeers, etc.) to the detriment of our (or at least my) greater enjoyment of the game.

Phew! Ok, so then what? All of this communal soul-searching was an effort to rebuild our game play from the most fundamental levels. In the course of talking about it, we discussed rewards. I made it very clear that whatever we played, I would reward players based on their defined motivations for game play. This would be the method by which they could "advance" their characters, and hopefully would also be the method by which we encouraged each other to play according to our goals. To hell w/ "challenge ratings" and the like.

We discussed creating our own game, selecting something out there, or strip-mining D&D 3E. We decided to do the the later -- tradition crept in, you might say. We all agreed there are many elements of the game we liked, and it certainly is familiar -- a common language.

So, I have spent the last couple weeks strip-mining the holy hell out of D&D 3E. I've completely removed classes, even levels to some degree and created a points-based construction, having coverted all the character class abilities to feats and assigned values to everything from Base Attack Bonus to Will Saves.

Yes, yes, I know. Why not just use GURPS or some such? <shrug> It's what my group wants, myself included, and it makes things far easier for me as DM (once all the work is done, anyway!). Call it evolution, not revolution.

In addition, I came up with at least one interesting idea using data cards to expediate combat. Here's how it works. Say the players fight Winter Wolves (a fight we really had not long ago). Rather than combat the five wolves, they "fight" the card which has a chart <stay with me now!> of how the wolves perform as their numbers dwindle. In effect, the wolves become one creature with multiple attacks. The cards "hit points" represent their thinning numbers (and weakened combat ability).

Here's the sneaky bit -- Rather than the players hitting each wolf and earning a "kill" we simply agree to describe what's happening. Should someone get a nasty blow in, or use an effective spell, the player or myself might describe two wolves running away yelping as their pack leader is struck down by an axe or scorched by magical flames.

I'm also considering awarding the cards themselves to the characters. The cards would have a "surprise" icon and number that helps the players in various ways --  used as "fate points" or maybe as a bonus to hit when needed. Things like that -- a kind of currency they can use for various effects. Rather obviously, my hang-up here is that this is once again rewarding Kick-ass, Take-names behavior. Still mulling it, as I don't want the rewards to confuse our goals or become confusing and not encourage behavior at all!

Well, I'm going to post more on where these ideas are going -- namely a very interesting Premise for a D&D campaign. More to come ... for now, I've got to prepare for our Wed. night session!

[Bankuei]

Having run 3 campaigns under 3E, I totally understand your feelings about wanting to keep a majority of the system, but make it meet with your goals.  Most of your ideas appear to do more with Hack Narrativism meets Hack Simulationist play, which basically means you are trying to hack the rules into doing what you want.  I don't know if I'd do the major rules rewrite that you're planning, but here's some nice quick fixes you might want to consider.

Motivation Based Rewards
 Have each player write down 3 goals for their characters.  These can be long term or short term, but you can see if the pc's have made any steps toward completing them each session and award an amount based on that, with a higher award for completing the goals.  In this case, fighting or defeating monsters becomes irrelevant unless that happens to coincide with a goal("Defeat the orc bandits of Tyrol")  Players may find that more difficult tasks reward better in the long run as you can keep milking them.

Class Based Rewards
 Fighters get xp for fighting, mages for magic casting and learning new magic, clerics for promoting their deities interest, etc.  You can award according to the difficulty and magnitude of the task.  This is an excellent supplement to the Motivation option above.

Start at 4th Level....
 I find that most of the character concepts I can see using in D&D are really a combination of multiclassing or prestige classes.  Starting at a higher level makes it easier to do this.

I really like the idea of the "challenge cards" serving as metagame control for the players as a reward for defeating them, but I'm not so sure about the damage chart...It could also be interesting if you allow players to start with "complication cards" that could be played in the game for extra xp.  Things like: Dropped weapon, Lost footing, Enemy gets away, Spell takes extra turn, etc.  The player would get to pick when it occurs, but obviously it would have to be during a critical moment...

Chris

[C. Edwards]

Hey Matt,

 This may not be any help since you've already done a bunch of work but you may want to check out a classless character system for DnD 3E from Red Leaf Games at http://www.netflash.net/llanade/redleafgames/index.php

 I haven't used it myself but I looked it over and it seems sound.


-Chris

[Clinton R. Nixon]

I'm also considering awarding the cards themselves to the characters. The cards would have a "surprise" icon and number that helps the players in various ways --  used as "fate points" or maybe as a bonus to hit when needed. Things like that -- a kind of currency they can use for various effects. Rather obviously, my hang-up here is that this is once again rewarding Kick-ass, Take-names behavior. Still mulling it, as I don't want the rewards to confuse our goals or become confusing and not encourage behavior at all!

Matt,

I know this is simple, but don't forget that kicking ass and taking names can be a story.

This sounds great, by the way - I want to hear more. Let us know how it goes.

[Matt Snyder]

This may not be any help since you've already done a bunch of work but you may want to check out a classless character system for DnD 3E from Red Leaf Games at http://www.netflash.net/llanade/redleafgames/index.php

I'll check it out. Thanks! I'm sure I've made mistakes along the way, so seeing what other folks have done would be worthwhile.

I know this is simple, but don't forget that kicking ass and taking names can be a story.

This sounds great, by the way - I want to hear more. Let us know how it goes.

Agreed, Clinton. I should have added that in all our discussions, all my players also acknowledged that they really enjoyed combat. Each said it was their "favorite" part of the game, by which I think they meant the kind of conflict the most enjoyed. While trying to properly guide that discussion, my only comment to them in return was that the combat has to be significant in some way. that is, it has to mean something, rather than be boring dice-fest against some random encounter.

For example, last night we had a session that included two significant combats. First, two of the players (and a couple NPCs) went hunting, because the denizens of their elven tower were starving after a "winter witch"(a mad druidess) covered the area with serious blizzard. They killed a small deer, and while dressing the thing, a starved owl-bear came crashing in. With some decent description, and some fun help from crazy dice rolls, the combat was quite enjoyable, and reinforced how desperate both they and the owlbear had become without any food. (they ate the scrawny owlbear, by the way ... yuck).

After "filling" their bellies, they set out to find the winter witch. Her lair was an old dwarf mine, and therein they fought a dozen dwarf ice wights, the druid's winter worlf and herself! Again, this time the fight was pretty dramatic, with one player nearly kicking bucket (had 1 STR point left before turning into an ice wight himself!). They slew the winter wolf and the ice witch, but not before she turned into a polar bear and kicked more butt.

In the end, the fight meant something to them, because they were fighting not only for their immediate survival, but also for the survival of their fellow elves, who go hungry back at the tower.

Now, Clinton, we haven't implemented the game/rewards/rules changes I mentioned above just yet. (Though the last fight got so bad at one point, I thought they'd all die and we'd start anew sooner than we'd planned!) However, the same situation might have been smoother under my "New Deal."

For example, after fighting the owl bear, I might have awarded the owlbear's card, which could have a "token" for anything from currency to perform better in the next fight to a "lead" they can "spend" to, say, follow the owl-bear's tracks to its den, where they might have found more food -- mushrooms, perhaps.

Similarly, the dozen "dwarf ice wights"would have had one card for the lot. This is where the cards become really useful, because the whole idea sprung from trying to figure out how to speed up combat. In this case, the PCs fight the 12 wights as one monster w/ multiple attacks, thereby reducing the number of targets to account for, and hence the number of dice, etc.

In the end, the wights' card might have an icon that represents the character's earning of a new item, for example. One of the wights has a magical battle ax, and that could be the reward. I've even considered putting a DC on the icon, and if the characters roll higher than that, they "find" the battle ax, for example.

As I said, I'm still working on this one. I like the idea, and I'll figure something out. Regardless, I'll be happy to share the materials with anyone and everyone. For starters, check out this (incomplete) sample NPC card I made to show my players what I'm getting at.

Have a good one,
Matt

[Gordon C. Landis]

Looks like that link is actually http://dragons.carlisle.ia.us/downloads/card_sample.pdf

A very interesting idea.   Thanks!

Gordon

[Matt Snyder]

Looks like that link is actually http://dragons.carlisle.ia.us/downloads/card_sample.pdf

A very interesting idea.   Thanks!

Gordon

Doh! That's what I get for my mindless organization. Thanks, Gordon, on both counts!