Simulationist Reward Systems

[David Bapst]

What are the reward systems that support a Simulationist CA?

I seem to have found several types that are repeated over and over again, but I'm unsure if they really support the CA. Anyone able to name any others? (Or name threads that are retreads of this?)

The first type I find predominantly in White Wolf games (although it shows up in quite a few others). This is mostly handing out experience points for different vague reasons; getting a point for being there, for "succeeding", for major story points, for adding to the color. Oddly enough, they might as well be points for just attending the session mostly, as such events (due to the nature of Sim) will happen regardless of a player's actions. This currency is also handed out for the (laughably useless) out-of-game works, such as character bios and game journals (artwork too, although I think artwork might actually find some use in Simulationism). On several independent occasions, I've seen White Wolf groups using voting systems to determine Best Roleplayer. This is normally an indication of who was most immersive, or even a popularity contest (it normally ties, although I managed to get receive this dubious honor for the majority of a Mage campaign, something which still mystifies me). The points are always for improving Character Effectiveness. White Wolf games sometimes require training times, but in almost group I've been in, GMs ignore such restrictions. (By the way, anyone notice most of the White Wolf experience system is metagame, which breaks Immersion?)

The second type pays its dues to Immersion, the old "If you train, you will increase Character Effectiveness." Some games change this with requiring points from showing up to sessions (see the White Wolf model) or large amounts of game world time to train (especially for learning special abilities). I've never actually played a game that uses such a system, so I'm curious to how much it benefits the CA by benefiting the Immersion.

Another type of reward system I see occasionally hands out some Drama System (or Dramatic Editing or whatever) currency for some action the GM finds particularly thematic. Oddly enough, I've recognized those moments in Sim games to being most analogous to when the players started to react to some personal conflict (shades of a suppressed Narrativist group?). I tend to mark up these currencies as being basically Character Effectiveness. Semi-related, Exalted gives small bonuses for adding to the Color through descriptions (the Stunt system, just like bonus dice in Sorceror). Getting magical charges in UA pretty similar: do specified thematic action A and get currency B.

Are there any reward system models that I have missed? I have a feeling that even though Simulationism is the most widespread CA (the number of systems published to support it), it shows remarkably little variation. Whenever I sit down to think about how one would go about designing a Simulationist game, the reward system problem leaps out like a tiger hidden in the underbrush of Color and Setting. Turning to my collection presents little in the way of a good historical example.

Thanks for reading,
-Dave

[Nathan P.]

I'm a bricolage person (see here (Chris Lehrich, Forge) and here and here (Ben Lehman, This Is My Blog). I would say that a Simulationist game would need a reward system that gives you bits and peices to incorporate into your character (if focusing on character effectiveness) or the setting (if focusing on player effectiveness). That is, if the process of Sim is Bricolage, than the reward system should enable that process.

I think this leads to the interesting point that completely out-of-game stuff could very well be part of a Sim reward system, like you get to choose any weapon inspired by a movie you've seen, or something. I'm not sure that that works, but it's a thought.

Anyway, think about it. A Nar game (should) reward addressing Premise, a Gam game (should) reward Stepping On Up, and a Sim game (should) reward, as I see it, Bricoling.

I don't think that really answers your question, but it's somewhere to start.

[beingfrank]

I think that the rewards in a game with a Sim CA involve acceptance of contributions to and interpretations of The Dream.  In a bricolage sense, incorporating bits into your character, other characters and the world, and also, other people incorporating bits that you've contributed to into other things.

I'm not sure that looking at the individual is ideal in this.  I think that many players get wrapped up out of game fiction/creativity/backstory/bricolage, because they feel that they only get that reward from work in isolation.  So a good system would support and encourage players riffing off each other's ideas, rather than in isolation.

You've picked an interesting, but tricky topic.  My thoughts on the subject keep getting tangled up between purely social rewards and CA rewards.  I'm out of ideas.

[Andrew Cooper]

RuneQuest had a pretty good Reward / Advancement system for a  Simulationist game.  If you used a skill and scored a critical success, you put a check mark next to that skill.  At the end of the session, you got to roll a d100.  If the roll was higher than your current skill, you added some points to your skill rating.  If not, you stayed the same.  This rewarded characters for engaging (exploring) with the setting or the system by actually *doing* something.  Since that is the goal of most Sim gaming it seemed like a useful and intuitive system.

[John Kim]

Well, here would be my list:

1) Semi-flat rate (i.e. awarded for default adventuring behavior)
2) GM-granted awards for cleverness, roleplaying, etc.
3) Explicit flat rate (i.e. True20)
4) Awarded for character training (i.e. Traveller)
5) Awarded for character skill use (i.e. RuneQuest, CoC, HarnMaster)
6) Player voted/dispensed awards (i.e. Shadows in the Fog, Primetime Adventures)
7) Awarded based on resolution roll results (i.e. James Bond 007, Dogs in the Vineyard)
8) No awards

Note that #1 and #2 blend into each other to a fair degree.  It only becomes #2 if there is significant disparity in XP awards, I would say.  Also, in practice I find that #5 is often semi-flat rate.  

Personally, I tend to go with flat rate or no awards, which were options you didn't mention.  This mildly supports immersion in the sense that the player doesn't have to think meta-game about what they have to do for game awards.  I'm not sure what it says as far as GNS.

On several independent occasions, I've seen White Wolf groups using voting systems to determine Best Roleplayer. This is normally an indication of who was most immersive, or even a popularity contest (it normally ties, although I managed to get receive this dubious honor for the majority of a Mage campaign, something which still mystifies me).

I think it is influenced by behavior in the game, so it's not quite a contest of pre-existing popularity.  I find that such awards encourage taking the spotlight and performing for the other players.  For example, Primetime Adventures explicitly does this.  As it describes "What the award is for depends on the players awarding it, but it can include snappy dialogue, great use of traits, exciting narration, advancement of the plot, or whatever makes the game more fun."

[David Bapst]

Nathan,
Thanks for pointing bricolage out for me. Interesting concept, although I'm not certain that it is solely a Sim phenomona, or one that would even a focus game in such a way.

Claire,
Fundementally, I agree with those that say reward systems should support the proposed CA. Social rewards (though on some level intangible) should still support the CA.

Andrew,
Thanks for the diagnosis of the old Runequest reward system.

John,
I'm of the opinion flat rates don't reward anything, so they aren't really reward systems. When the reward system isn't working as a proper reward system (motivating some player behavior), and I've carefully considered my gaming experiences in this regard, the group defaults to some other less tangible reward system (social rewards, for example).

I think seeing this variation has opened my eyes. I've reconsidered what I considered to be the CA-design for several games, and found myself drawing lines between TSoY, Exalted and UA. All three show regimented genre actions (Keys, Stunts, Gaining Charges) as an aspect of reward system. Claire, you gave me an idea on how to make that a group activity...
-Dave

[John Kim]

I'm of the opinion flat rates don't reward anything, so they aren't really reward systems. When the reward system isn't working as a proper reward system (motivating some player behavior), and I've carefully considered my gaming experiences in this regard, the group defaults to some other less tangible reward system (social rewards, for example).

Well, flat rates reward attendance -- which is a highly important thing for games.  :-)  Personally, I find that if a player shows up I am usually pleased with what they do.  So my main concern is getting them to show up.  

There are less obvious and explicit rewards, of course.  (Nitpick: I consider real-world rewards such as friendship to be far more tangible than game points, rather than less tangible.)  But those are there and important regardless of the game-mechanical rewards.   I would say rather that social rewards are the default regardless, and game-mechanical rewards are a slight modifier to that.  That is, a player is more likely to be swayed by, say, flirting with a guy she thinks is hot than by getting a few more XP.  

There are plenty of games where I ignored the mechanical reward system even when there was one -- leaving my character weaker or dead as a result.

[Rob Carriere]

I've never seen this formalized in a rule set, but I have observed the following process in several games that had per-character subplots: player X does well with his subplot, which becomes more detailed and interesting as a result, other players gravitate towards this subplot, either by having their character show up or by paying OOC attention when this subplot comes up. As a result, the subplot gets both more definition and screentime: the reward.

On one occasion we consciously manipulated this process by all paying extra attention to the subplot of a new, uncertain, player and succeeded in pulling him in and making him more confident. Sort of an in-the-SIS way of saying `we're happy to have you here' to reinforce the real-world statements to that effect.

SR
--

[David Bapst]

Well, flat rates reward attendance -- which is a highly important thing for games.  :-)  Personally, I find that if a player shows up I am usually pleased with what they do.  So my main concern is getting them to show up.  

There are less obvious and explicit rewards, of course.  (Nitpick: I consider real-world rewards such as friendship to be far more tangible than game points, rather than less tangible.)  But those are there and important regardless of the game-mechanical rewards.   I would say rather that social rewards are the default regardless, and game-mechanical rewards are a slight modifier to that.  That is, a player is more likely to be swayed by, say, flirting with a guy she thinks is hot than by getting a few more XP.  

There are plenty of games where I ignored the mechanical reward system even when there was one -- leaving my character weaker or dead as a result.

John,
Attendence, I find, is a tricky issue, and that flat rate experience has never actually made players want to be at a session of a game I've ran, if the game didn't already do make them to be there by itself. As far as social rewards/system rewards go, John, I think me and you have just had wildly different experiences. Most of my experiences are Gamist, and you can imagine the cries of "not playing right" coming from the rest of the group when players throw away the chance of recieving mechanical rewards on some social reward. I used to ignore the reward system too, in the past, although I don't see much virtue in it now. Maybe it's just my understanding of theory, but I don't see how a CA can develop if the players aren't all concentrated on the reward system (which could be social rewards primarily, like Baron Munchausen). I guess in the case of reward systems, you and I just have differing interpretations based on what we've seen individually. No worries.
-Dave

[John Kim]

As far as social rewards/system rewards go, John, I think me and you have just had wildly different experiences. Most of my experiences are Gamist, and you can imagine the cries of "not playing right" coming from the rest of the group when players throw away the chance of recieving mechanical rewards on some social reward. I used to ignore the reward system too, in the past, although I don't see much virtue in it now. Maybe it's just my understanding of theory, but I don't see how a CA can develop if the players aren't all concentrated on the reward system (which could be social rewards primarily, like Baron Munchausen). I guess in the case of reward systems, you and I just have differing interpretations based on what we've seen individually.

It's true that my experience is pretty heavily non-Gamist.  Though, it's interesting that you distinguish mechanical and social rewards there, when what you are describing are social penalties.  Not maximizing XP is relatively meaningless unless there is such a social penalty for not doing so, like what you describe.

[M. J. Young]

I'm going to suggest that people go back to read Applied Theory again. There are several points that are missed here.

[*]Skill improvement systems and reward systems are not necessarily the same thing. Improving skills as a reward system most frequently denotes gamist play.[*]All reward systems are two pronged: for what are rewarded, and with what are you rewarded? Many home-brew reward systems fail in this regard. They want to encourage more "roleplaying" and less emphasis on "butt-kicking", so they give experience points for "roleplaying"--which are spent to improve the character's abilities at "butt-kicking".[*]A genuine simulationist reward system should reward eager exploration with opportunities for greater exploration. That might mean increasing the survivability of a character so that he can explore more dangerous places (e.g., raising damage or survival ratings, increasing defensive and effectiveness skills). It might mean opening new doors into areas of the world not previously accessible (invitation to participate in a higher level of the royal court, opportunity to travel to another country or continent or planet, providing new contacts who can point in new directions).[/list:u]I've seen very few effective and consistent simulationist reward systems.

--M. J. Young

[Silmenume]

Hey Dave,

I'm a Sim bricolage guy too!  (Hi Nathan! *waves hello*)  Enough of silliness.  In short I think that both Nathan and Claire are actually closer in their assertions about rewards than might seem on the surface.  As far a Nathan's assertion goes, the examples he sites are ones we employ all the time.  What it essentially boils down to is placing more bits in the shed for the player to bricole with.  A "good" bit would be one that is both interesting to the Player and has lots of "in game" entailments (From Dictionary.com - To have, impose, or require as a necessary accompaniment or consequence.)  The term "entailment" was also drawn from Chris' thread on Bricolage.  It should be noted however, that all rewards are first and foremost social in nature.  That they can have an effect on the process of Exploration is not strictly necessary, but rewards can be constructed and employed in such a way as to facilitate CA expression during Exploration.

Given the nature of bricolage, I do not believe it is possible to bricole in complete isolation while there are other players present.  That being said, I'm not so sure mass or group rewards work.  The idea is to encourage a type of behavior and if one person is contributing effectively and another is not and both get the same reward then what kind of message is being sent (which behaviors are being encouraged)?  I do agree that encouraging players to riff on each others ideas is important, but this more of the equivalent (in loose analogy only) of trying to get Gamists to address Challenge more.  In continuing this analogy - Do said Gamist players need rewards to be encouraged to address Challenge more often or do we reward them for addressing Challenge more effectively?  I'm of the opinion that rewarding frequency is not nearly as effective as rewarding effectiveness (or the equivalent in Nar or Sim).

In the game I play in these are the current methods employed.  I should not that the means of reward are constantly evolving – which is right out of the playbook for bricolage.

[list=1][*]Tie Character advancement into "role-play" rewards.  IOW a Character cannot advance levels if no or little effort is made to "role-play" or I should say "bricole."  These rewards are handed out in the form of "wisdom checks."  They "represent" the effects of life experiences which in a way ties in with increased Character effectiveness.  They are usually handed out for "interesting, clever, impassioned, etc. role-play or for the Character experiencing something new that has the potential to effect them.  (Like a country kid seeing a bustling metropolis for the first time, or a person witnessing the casting of magic in a "magic-less" world.)[*]Players are also rewarded for playing in Character when it is obviously to the Players disadvantage.  Again this is typically rewarded with "wisdom checks."  I should note that in all these cases that the "wisdom checks" are handed out at the moment when the act was committed (perhaps better thought as right after) to the link to the reward and the action close and tight.[*]Secondary skills are increased through use and more frequently through clever use.  These skills require more checks to go up levels as the level of the skill increases.  (6 checks to get to 6th level, 7 checks to get to 7th level, etc.)[*]20's and 1's on d20's are frequently rewarded with appropriate checks to skills as a means to imbue die rolls with a sense of "significance/meaning."  How is this important?  The dice after a while become less of an intrusion and become more integrated into the mythic process as they do pick up a certain "significance."  In our game dice seem less of a resolution mechanic than an indicator of fate, which is a very strong undercurrent to Tolkien's ME works.  So after a while this link between 20's and events – such as increasing skills for example – fosters an air of excitement and "immersion."  "What does this (die roll) mean?" constantly swirls in the minds of the players – which is the mythic (bricoling) process in action.[*]At the end of the night every player gets a "player rating."  This is expressed as a number almost always between zero and ninety-nine.  This is reward for the sum total of the player's "performance" that night and is a "discount" to the number of XP's needed to gain a level.  While this is very cool in and of itself, a high number is coveted among the players as a matter of social standing.[*]Also at the end of the night a "best role-player" is awarded a star which is affixed to his folder.  10 stars means the player becomes a "black folder player" and certain privileges are then extended to said player.  Not the least of which is an invitation to all subsequent games.  As we play many characters over time, we can occasionally trade in the stars for a special Character.[*]When a player gets their Character to 10th level a 4" bronze star is awarded with the Character's name engraved in it.  While this may sound somewhat Gamist, remember one cannot go up levels without "role-play" checks and they are only awarded by the GM.  The measure by which this is rewarding is determined is entirely subjective, but after a while one does get a feel for what is considered "effective play."[*]Consistent "good role-play" is rewarded with extra consideration when generating new Characters.[*]There have been "award ceremonies" where there is a dinner and a ceremony and trophies handed out to the players of Characters in various categories.  The decisions in this case are all founded on player nomination and balloting.[*]Sometimes is just the GM or another player or players slapping said player on the back, high-fiving, etc.[*]Sometimes the GM will reward a player by allowing an event to be resolved by Drama resolution whereby the player's statements are entered into the SIS without challenge or eliciting a point of contact.[*]Finally there are a nearly infinite number of in game (within the SIS) rewards that could included weapons, alliances, power, followers, wealth, equipment, insight, having a 1000 Vikings come to your rescue, etc.[*]After or between game discussions with the GM about one's play and what was good and what was lacking and being involved in discussions about the future of the game and opening up new areas of land or designing a new Character are all very cool "rewards" for effective "role-play."  The interesting things is, that in this last "category" its not so much an official "reward" but rather an inclusion in the ongoing expansion and setting up of the game space based upon the source material because said player has demonstrated in play such a solid understanding or feeling for the fictional "world."[/list:o]I know I've kinda rambled here, but I hope that I have in some way offered you some additional points to consider.  I think the long and short of it is that in the end the rewards will eventually become highly localized and specific to whatever is meaningful to a given group.

*I suppose I should note that the game I play in has been running for over 20 years real time.