Shared Setting design

[Matt Gwinn]

DC Heroes uses a similar system where you can spend experience points to effect your die rolls.  You can't seize directorial power or create anything, but it's the same basic idea.

My DC Heroes charcater went many games without advancing due to me blowing all my experience points during play.

,Matt G.

[Buddha Nature]

This is something I have been struggling with for the last few days creating some "house rules" (read meta) for a D&D3E game I may have to run.  Specifically I am looking at what I want to reward my players for (outside the normal killing things).  In thinking about it I would like to see them both roleplay their characters at a higher level and take control of narration in certain ways.  As such I was looking at a chip system wherein they would gain chips for certain actions (like good rp-ing) and could spend them to affect the environemnt and take brief narrative control.  When they spent them like this they would gain XP.  This way they got the payoff of XP, and I got the payoff of them taking a bit more Auth/Dir stance.

I think here again, you should look at how you hope the players would play this game (awk?)  Look at how you want to reward them, how you want to "punish" them.  Do you want to make the narration a priveledge (they pay for it), do you want to make it something you really want them to do (reward them for their attempts), or do you just want it to be an option (they can just do it).

If the first, I would say they pay a karma point if they are allowed, otherwise they are politely denied and they keep their point.  If the second, they are given a karma point when they successfully narrate.  If the third, either toss karma altogether.

If it is always pay, no matter what, they will become very wary of doing it because it will _always_ be a loss of karma points.  If they are denied too many times, they will become discouraged.

It might be best in this regard to (when a character is introduced) say up front whether or not they are "optionable" - or possibly mention when they are optionable if it fluctuates.

You may even want  to say that any NPC's the players come up with are either A) always optionable or B) have to be optioned by the GM for use.

Oooh...  This is good stuff... =)

-Shane

[Bailywolf]

Well, no one said all character options had to cost the same...

Say I want to option the watching woman from my previous example, but the GM has some plans for her.  Instead of saying "no" absolutly- something I still think should warent a karma point (...not the least because I find the concept of the GM being bound by certain rules amusing).  

So the GM says when I bid one Karma, "sorry, her fate is worth more than that."  Frustrated, a bid 2.  The GM shakes his head.  Finaly I decide I must have the Option, so I bid all 3 of my points.  The GM nods sagely, and says "You have her option."  I also have no more Karma left.

What I get is the chance to shape the whole campaign with my own vision for that one potentialy very significant NPC.  

Now if the GM had already introdiced some detail about the character, I couldn't negate what he has already provided...this alone will prevent a certain amount of cheese.

But the proposed system does depend on trust between player and GM...not a defensive anti-asshole GM posture to keep the players in line.

[Buddha Nature]

Good point, definitely.  If you allow it to be a bidding thing you can make it a little better.  Especially since then the GM can get a feel of how much you want it, as can you.  The other thing is that maybe other players can help you bid (or even bid against you for control).

-Shane

[Bailywolf]

I did intend to mention the other players bidding for things... but it sliped my mind.  Good points.  If I want her to the tune of 3 points, but by buddy has a great idea for her and has 4 points to spend...but then if none of these meet the "reserve" set by the GM....