I have been running a new D20 campaign since April and things are going pretty well.

The players:

D&A: the young couple from my previous campaign
S: a new player who joined at the start
M: a new player who joined a few weeks ago

Not present:
J: another player from the previous campaign who has had to drop out
R: another new player who joined a few weeks ago

I'd like to highlight two play experiences from recent sessions:

Currently, I am running the old Judge's Guild module, Dark Tower.

The first experience was after a running battle where the PCs were able to capture some prisoners. They of course wanted to question them. Instead of my old method of making them make all sorts of rolls, and not really get much information, I called for one intimidation check, and then we dropped into a Q&A session where I dumped a lot of information, and gave them opportunities to ask their own questions. This was incredibly satisfying and seemed well received.

The second experience was the last combat in Tuesday's session. The PCs encountered a hall with two intelligent, spell casting, doors, one at each end. The two doors are arguing over a diamond sitting in the center of the hall. The PCs listened at the door, and then burst in, taking a while to grok that it really was the doors and not some people out of sight. One PC charged into the room and smashed the diamond. Another decided to grab the treasure lying at the base of the door they entered (each door had it's own little pile of treasure). That door of course took offense and blasted the PC. The other door took offense at the PC who smashed the diamond. Then the PC who smashed the diamond charged the other door and started to smash it.
An NPC, who had been holding, not quite sure what to do then also charged the door, and the two quickly smashed it. Then the three characters smashed the other door. I really liked how the players reacted to the situation, and took charge, even if I had sort of hoped they might only destroy the evil door (the one they entered by was good, the other was evil). Smashing the diamond in the center was just so cool.

My biggest issue with the campaign is what the reward cycle actually is, and what I might do to improve things.

We started off by using the Sweet 20 experience system, but we pretty quickly agreed it wasn't working well. A's character was earning twice as many XP as the others without really breaking a sweat (she plays a spryte healer/blaster and her keys were coward, healing, and conscience). J's character was earning about half as much as anyone else. One of his keys was key of the vow - keep his word, he only gave his word once (passing up several opportunities). S has key of glittering gold which didn't work very well with the way I hand out treasure. Several people have key of bloodlust which isn't working too well. S did do a good job of exercising key of conscience.

So we decided to just do arbitrary XP awards with each player getting the same XP. I also basically give them the appropriate treasure to meet the DMG's treasure guidelines by level each time they level up. We then decided to use the keys to drive awarding hero points, basically turning the 3+ XP awards into a hero point (limit one hero point earned per session). A was still racking up a hero point every session (pretty much every session, someone goes down hard and needs to be healed - triggering key of conscience). M has recently started to do a good job with key of the scary (his character has a ring of sustenance so he doesn't have to eat and drink, and after being poisoned at the inn, he has decided to forgo all sustenance even for pleasure, and has been quite vocal about it, and really does have the other players considering his humanity).

I guess there is still the reward cycle of leveling up, but that isn't driven directly by game play. It seems like the hero points are the primary reward cycle, but if so, some people are getting rewarded for actively seeking their keys, and others are just muddling along.

I think what I want to do is crisp up the keys and make it clear that the player has to actively seek them, but also make it easier for the players to seek the not quite so obvious ones. Probably allowing the possibility of gaining more than one hero point per session would be good. I also need to encourage the other half of the reward cycle by making sure players get to use the hero points to do cool things, M has made a couple uses of hero points to do cool things, but mostly they have been used as "get out of death free" cards.

I'd definitely love some suggestions for idea sources for creating new keys.

I also need to work on how the counter works, and make it a payoff worth taking. One thing that would be cool is for the payoff to include some kind of permanent bonus on the character sheet (related to the counter of course).

Frank

ffilz wrote: It seems like the hero points are the primary reward cycle, but if so, some people are getting rewarded for actively seeking their keys, and others are just muddling along.

Frank, more questions than answers from me, too - for now.

First, you're using some Keys that aren't listed in the Sweet 20 document: I see Healing, Vow (the way you're using it anway) and Scary. Could you post the descriptions of those Keys and their Counters so we can make more specific suggestions? Some of your problems may be in the design and application of these Keys.

Second, what do heropoints do in your game? What's the benefit of using a third type of reward in addition to truncated d20 (levelling up arbitrarily)  plus  truncated Sweet20 (Keys but not for XP)?

I guess there is still the reward cycle of leveling up, but that isn't driven directly by game play. It seems like the hero points are the primary reward cycle, but if so, some people are getting rewarded for actively seeking their keys, and others are just muddling along.

...I also need to encourage the other half of the reward cycle by making sure players get to use the hero points to do cool things

I also need to work on how the counter works, and make it a payoff worth taking. One thing that would be cool is for the payoff to include some kind of permanent bonus on the character sheet (related to the counter of course).

For ease of reference (mine, partly), the Sweet20 rules are to be found here.

Kerstin

Using Keys (assuming these are the TSOY kind of Keys, like the TROS spiritual attributes) isn't a functional technique to begin with, if you're working with a traditional dungeon module. At least everybody should know beforehand what kind of adventure it will be, otherwise they run the risk of choosing Keys that are impossible to apply within the adventure's boundaries.

Keys are only suitable for games where the players have major influence in the story, so they can set their characters up for xp gain themselves.

Just some general observations. Carry on.

Being a D&D 3.5 player, I have some comments but I'm going to wait on most of them until Frank can get to Kerstin's questions.  The only real comment that I have right now is that too many reward cycles would seem confusing and I might consider avoiding that approach.

Ah, good, lots of thought provoking questions. Of course in my usual writing, style, I've muddled things by shortcutting a few things... Kerstin, thanks for posting the Sweet20 link, I should have (Sweet20 experience is Clinton's adaptation of TSOY's keys to D20's XP/leveling mechanism).

Non standard keys:

The Key of the Scary (darn, not sure where I found this...): We all worry about you. 1 XP for uneasing people in a scene, 2 XP for calling into question the character being reasonably human and 5 XP for calling into question the player being reasonably human.  Counter: Put another character at ease.

The Key of Healing: this was player defined, defined to be sort of like Key of Conscience. One issue is that players want to create their own keys, but we haven't really sat down and worked out just how the key should work.

Hero points can be used for several things. One is to gain a +20 on a roll (and if the roll would have succeeded without the +20, there are usually other benefits such as automatic crit on an attack), Another is to get an extra "turn". Another (which is historically how they have been most heavily used in my games) is to avoid death. Other uses are also possible.

I'm not sure I would count the keys as a separate reward mechanism from the hero points. The keys are the thing that drive acquiring the hero points. Now there is a question, which is part of my big question, is leveling up and gaining treasure in D20 part of the reward cycle if everyone gets the same amount, and the reward isn't directly tied to events in play? If it still is, then adding keys and hero points might well be muddling the waters. If it isn't, or it isn't a strong enough drive, adding hero points might be just fine. Adding a different reward for the counter may be muddling the waters too much (and maybe the counter is not needed if we aren't trying to address premise).

On Chris's question of whether it's really a problem if some of the players are muddling along: In one sense not really. But it feels like the players really don't grok the keys at all. Of course maybe that's because there really isn't something to grok (or the thing to be groked is that they don't do what they're advertised to be).

But some of the comments the players have made, and the actions some players have taken suggest there is something there. One player remarked that he liked the fact that the keys rewarded a player for playing a "consistent" character (my sumarizing of his words). The player with the key of the scary is clearly being proactive. Earlier in play, one of the players with key of conscience was being quite proactive.

What do I want my reward system to achieve? I like the idea of hero points to give the players more control. Being able to refuse death (sitting out) is a good thing. Using a hero point to enable something cool is also good (M used a hero point to jump a balcony and land safely, despite his heavy armor - good start, but the followthrough failed since he didn't have the speed to chase the opponents - I needed to do something a bit more there, or make sure the player had a stash of hero points so he could then have burned another to catch up with an opponent). So the root of the problem is hero points are cool, but the players don't get enough of them to have a real impact.

My initial use of Sweet 20 was definitely not functional. If I didn't want to have people leveling up at different rates, giving individual XP is absolutely the wrong way to accomplish that. The use of something like keys to personalize how the players acquire hero points, and to make an explicit system for awarding them seems to be good idea on the surface, however, clearly the keys have to be capable of working in the framework of traditional module play.

Frank

Hmmm. I feel I'm sensing an imbalance in the keys.  Or at least, that there are two macro-types of them at work here.  Some of them are "action" keys -- if you do X, the key's relevant.  Others are (and this is a finely cut distinction) "behavior" keys -- if you act X way, they key's relevant.

To get a little more specific about that, I'm suggesting that Scary and Vow and Conscience are "behavior" keys while Healing is an "action" key. 

My *suspicion* is that action keys are a point of "imbalance" in how things are working out.  Hm.  Perhaps it's more this: the things I'm calling "behavior" keys seem to be more about choices that could easily go either way, whereas the things I'm calling "action" keys are more of a well, duh, of course that's going to happen thing.  There's no struggle over the choice with the action ones ... or more to the point, there's not often much incentive to choose the Counter rather than the Key.

Maybe part of the "fix" here would be to make Key rewards only get handed out if the Counter for that Key is also viably on the table.  For example, Glittering Gold favors wealth... but unless there's also a real opportunity to give up that wealth, it's not a case where that Key should be rewarded.

Someone else also suggested that keys won't work with a Standard Dungeon Module.  That may well be the case.  Much like with Fate's aspects (Keys certainly share some lines of thought with 'em), you're going to get the most punch out of keys if you make certain to design an adventure with the chosen keys in mind.

Picking out the chosen keys from an earlier post, we have Coward, Healing, Conscience, Glittering Gold, Bloodlust, Scary.  (I do think Healing and Conscience are too un-different as to be both allowed on the same character.  Healing just seems like a specific version of Conscience.  Avoid overlap.)

Every character has multiple keys ... roll a die and/or pick one from each character for each session, and make sure those issues come up in the session you're about to run.  So, looking at that list, you know what "countered" questions to make sure your storyline asks:

Do I run like my instincts tell me, or do I stand and fight for what's right? (Coward)
Do I heal lesser folk even if they've done something bad/might not deserve it? (Healing)
Do I give this money I've rightly won to the people who need it most? (Glittering Gold)
Do I give into my desire for a bloody fight even if the long-term consequences don't look so good? (Bloodlust)
Do I comfort those in distress, or do I unthinkingly add to their fears? (Scary)

I guess part of what I'm saying here is that the counters are what's really interesting about the keys.  They have to be just as tasty, as options, to make going  with the key meaningful.

Hi Frank,

First, I'm really heartened by this post, because it sounds like you're having more fun now  than you were before, and that's great.

Second, I'm thrilled that you're running the great Paul Jaquays' classic Dark Tower. Played through it once, run it twice, love it to death. Haffrung Helleyes. The Sons of Set. Those crazy-ass magic gems and the Lions of Mitra. Oh, man, it's enough to get me to dust off my D&D books even today. The doors in your post are a great bit too.

Third, it's absolutely astonishing how many D&D games I've been in that have just turned into flat xp awards based on, well, nothing except that you were sitting there playing, or a general sense that it's 'time to level up'. This is not an accident, I think.

Now to suggest some answers to your question.

It's a party game, so you're going to want the party to stay roughly equivalent in effectiveness to ensure everyone has fun, which in D&D usually means roughly equivalent in level, which usually means roughly equivalent xp awards. You could fool around a little, though. Here's a way that might be fun: say a session is worth 2500 xp per player. Have an additional award of, say, 500 xp given out on the basis of the person the players vote for (and you don't vote yourself, Mr. DM, or even make suggestions) for MVP. However they want to define MVP. In other words, let them reward themselves for what they like: watch what they reward, and don't claim authority over it.

This doesn't work in all groups, but if they decide they really want this carrot then they'll start trying to play better (whatever that means for your group) to earn the social recognition of having delivered the most fun to the game (again, whatever fun means for your group). Again, not too big a reward, but enough to be meaningful and make people want it.

This suggestion points to a more general point - experience can be part of the reward cycle, but so, as you've noted, can other things like hero points be. (Luke's Artha rules for BW Revised, which used to be free on the intarweb, are to my mind a model of how a good 'hero point' system should work.) So the most general advice is 'figure out what's giving you and your players the most fun, and find some way of making that explicit and rewarding it'. The feedback loop of hero points let you do cool stunts and stuff give you more hero points to do cool stuff with can be a good one. You seem to have a pretty good system of playing your character the way you want to play it gives you hero points which you can do cool stuff and/or preserve your character with...not a feedback loop, but a decently functional system.

If you guys are mostly into exploration and roleplaying then in a way the reward system isn't going to be as important to you - you'll get the reward just by sitting down at the table. In D&D the exploraiton will include lots of fighting and puzzles and talking to weird potential foes, though, so improved effectiveness at those things, and improved interest of the process of play in which you do those things, will likely be what increases your fun the most.

Note to Iago: There are substantial opportunities for character-driven play in Dark Tower, so in that sense it's not a 'standard dungeon module' (I'd maintain that a perusal of actual dungeon modules indicates there's no such thing, but that's another thread); but it's still D&D, so some Keys are going to be better than others. Which is going to lead to xp imbalance which is going to lead to not fun play over the long term, so I think Frank's right to be looking for a different reward system.

Sean wrote:
Note to Iago: There are substantial opportunities for character-driven play in Dark Tower, so in that sense it's not a 'standard dungeon module' (I'd maintain that a perusal of actual dungeon modules indicates there's no such thing, but that's another thread); but it's still D&D, so some Keys are going to be better than others. Which is going to lead to xp imbalance which is going to lead to not fun play over the long term, so I think Frank's right to be looking for a different reward system.

Hi Frank,

Here's another idea- reward the group, not individuals.  That is- D&D usually rewards fighting by splitting xp across the board for everyone who is fighting- why not just reward the whole party flat for everything?  Granted, some folks will work harder than others to really rake in the xp, but you will find even the others will probably at least assist in getting points.  Everyone levels equally, but incentive to push for whatever you're planning on rewarding is still there.

Also, don't forget that people can switch out Keys for new ones.

Chris

Bankuei wrote:
Here's another idea- reward the group, not individuals.  That is- D&D usually rewards fighting by splitting xp across the board for everyone who is fighting- why not just reward the whole party flat for everything?  Granted, some folks will work harder than others to really rake in the xp, but you will find even the others will probably at least assist in getting points.  Everyone levels equally, but incentive to push for whatever you're planning on rewarding is still there.

Iago has a good point in the differentiation between types of keys, and that is part of what I'm stumbling on. Good point also about conscience and healer being too similar.

On the other hand, the idea of making a choice between the counter and following the key is addressing premise, which I'm pretty confident isn't where we're going.

Sean, yes, definitely having more fun than in the past. There are some key things that are helping it. The group is smaller which is a good thing. Attendance is also very consistent (3 of the active players have made every session, and have not been a cause for skipping a session, one of the new players has made every session since he joined). A big enabler for that consistency is playing on week nights, and since the 4th original player has dropped out, we have been able to move to Tuesday night which works really well with my schedule (I do lots of long weekends, I have never had a long weekend include Tuesday, but Thursday night that we used to play is generally part of any long weekend). Of course one of the players did play the Tuesday before GenCon (he flew out Monday morning).

Yea, Dark Tower is definitely a cool old module. I don't remember if I ever ran it in full, I did play in it once or twice.

Third, it's absolutely astonishing how many D&D games I've been in that have just turned into flat xp awards based on, well, nothing except that you were sitting there playing, or a general sense that it's 'time to level up'. This is not an accident, I think.

Quick note - I cross posted with those last three posts - back to those in a bit...

Frank

Hi Frank.

I think you're onto it. If people are really into being their characters, then keys - hero points - reinforcing who your character is cycle can be a feedback loop after all, because then you rake in the more hero points for being more who you are. Just keep the xp awards more or less constant to ensure that the party stays together, and let hero points drive the reward cycle.

Well, and magic items. Magic items are always a joy in D&D.

The MVP thing might bring the wife out, or not. Of course you might try to set it up for her to do something cool and encourage the other players to vote for her if she seems like a credible candidate during some session - but it's really impossible to judge how social stuff like that is going to play out at a table I haven't seen. For instance - if the guys got jacked up over the reward, would she respond to their enthusiasm positively or negatively? That's really hard for anyone but you and your group to say.

Best,

Sean

A quick question: did the players choose their own Keys? I ask because I ran a two-shot d20 adventure with pregens, using the Sweet20 system. I found that some players got saddled with Keys that they just weren't that interested in, because I chose the Keys when I made the characters.

Whether or not they chose the Keys, now that you've all seen them in action, why not have a session where you ask people if they want to change up the Keys? Brainstorm some new Keys, as a group so you'll all vibe off each other, and then start the next game with an opportunity for the players who are changing Keys to buy off their old ones and replace them. Bingo! They'll get a nice bump in XP, plus they'll get a new Key, that hopefully they grok better than the last one.

When I read the Sweet20 rules, I got the distinct impression they haven't been extensively playtested, so you might want to tweak them a bit. Or even ask a player to swap out one like Bloodlust... presumably, even folks with Bloodlust have their lust for blood sated, eventually.

Also, beware Keys that reward mere color (the Scary Key could easily fall into that category, depending on how it's played in your group). I had a character with a Key that revolved around his insatiable Hunger... the intention being that he would take big risks to devour people that he shouldn't, and get himself into trouble. But I made a mistake and made the smallest XP award in the Key be merely for "shirking your duty to feed". The player racked up tons of XP, simply by noting that he'd eat something just before each scene. It became increasingly difficult to arrange consequences for the behavior, so he often got 'free' XP for very little risk.

Consider, if the Scary guy makes the rest of the party uncomfortable... but there's no consequences (they still trust him, etc), it's just free XP. Hardly seems fair when another PC has to actually sacrifice wealth or enter into mortal combat to earn his points.

I agree with those who are recommending a simpler reward mechanism. You're currently using three things for rewards (and that's not counting treasure for the moment), none of which are being used the way they were designed:

- XP, awarded arbitrarily, so people can level up now and then - this is a change from the default XP tables.
- Keys, an incentive to players to decice what they wish to be rewarded for - this is a change from Clinton's system in that this doesn't give XP. I suspect he had a good reason for making Keys tie into XP, XP and levelling (and the effect of levelling up) being at the core of d20.
- Hero points, with a mixed bag of effects, involving a general "other things" clause if I read you correctly. Conan RPG does a similar thing with Fate Points (awarded arbitrarily by the GM), the designer wanted to promote bits of narr play with this - but as far as I remember, what FPs can be used for is defined quit a bit more narrowly than what you're doing.

Not saying that any of this is necessarily wrong, but taken together it seems unnecessarily complicated and a hell of a lot of changes to default rules for no very clear reason.  

ffilz wrote:
The Key of Healing: this was player defined, defined to be sort of like Key of Conscience. One issue is that players want to create their own keys, but we haven't really sat down and worked out just how the key should work.

Now there is a question, which is part of my big question, is leveling up and gaining treasure in D20 part of the reward cycle if everyone gets the same amount, and the reward isn't directly tied to events in play?

Using a hero point to enable something cool is also good (M used a hero point to jump a balcony and land safely, despite his heavy armor - good start, but the followthrough failed since he didn't have the speed to chase the opponents - I needed to do something a bit more there, or make sure the player had a stash of hero points so he could then have burned another to catch up with an opponent).

My initial use of Sweet 20 was definitely not functional. If I didn't want to have people leveling up at different rates, giving individual XP is absolutely the wrong way to accomplish that.

ffilz wrote: And perhaps it's as simple as that. Tell the players that the idea is for them to define what is cool about their character, and then play the character, and get feedback in the way of hero points which the player can use to help further demonstrate their character (part of which is denying death, saying "no, I'm not done with this character yet." or "my character doesn't go down in the fight, he's cool and shrugs off the deadly blow and keeps on fighting.").

On the other hand, this player may not be proactive ever. This is the young wife, the one who really shrinks into her shell, and may be there primarily to enable her husband's play. Though she does come out of that shell, sometimes to say really random, but energizing things, sometimes with a quite logical contribution. So she is contributing to the game. I'd just like to find a way to get the feedback loop going with her.

Hi Frank,

I have a little difficulty understanding why you changed your reward system. D&D is all about killing monsters and dodging traps, that's why you get XP for it: It's the point of play.

From what little I know about your game and old Judges Guild modules, the characters in the game are still fighting monsters, right? If that's the case, D&D's standard XP system would work pretty good for you. So, why change it?

--Jasper

Jasper wrote:
I have a little difficulty understanding why you changed your reward system. D&D is all about killing monsters and dodging traps, that's why you get XP for it: It's the point of play.

In Frank's defense, I think he's on to something.

He's not using the Keys for Narrativism, he's using them for Simulationism. The idea is that you define what you want your character to be like, what you want to it to do in play, and then when you do that, you get rewarded somehow.

Having the reward be xp is problematic in D&D for reasons Frank understands and we've already hashed out in the thread. So he wants to make the reward be hero points instead - not for the purpose of narrativism so much as for character preservation (since exploring character and setting is what they're focused on here) and for the ability to keep doing what your character does well (which further defines the character as 'the healing guy' or 'the heroic warrior' or whatever). And, perhaps with some tweaking, I think this is a great choice for him - he can create a feedback loop a little like Luke's Artha feedback loop, though probably with different CA priorities.

I don't want to put too many more words in Frank's mouth for him but I do sort of feel like a lot of the posters on this thread are missing a lot of what he's saying. He's enjoying his game more, is using the term 'reward system' correctly, and has a clear problem that he's trying to solve. This is a very focused request on his part for figuring out how to reward the kinds of play he wants to reward.

Oh, I'm not missing that really, but I am suggesting that the nar take on them does, at least, provide some of the balance that simply isn't inherently there in keys as they stand. 

Some keys are going to have a vast abundance of opportunities to operate, whereas others are going to have to have things deliberately put in their way by the GM.  If Frank isn't inclined to put those things in the way of the "less abundantly available" keys, then those keys become bad choices.

There are a few fixes I could see for this -- for example, the keys that are most abundant in their triggering could have the smallest rewards, while "narrower" or "rarer" ones would get bigger dollops when they have an opportunity to get relevant.  In general, the rewards need to be tuned such that each player is getting about the same quantity of reward over a largeish length of time.  Or, instead, situationally, you could leave the narrower/rarer keys as is, and simply inflict greater consequences for pursuing the more common/abundantly available keys (like bloodlust).  But that may skate too close to a non-Sim way of addressing things again.

Well, he's changing it because he knows that he really doesn't want to play "killing monsters and dodging traps" as the focus of play.

The real question is why he's not playing TSOY, given that he's using it's reward system.

Wow, what a flood of responses. Give me a while to catch up and think about these.

Thanks

Frank

What do I want my reward system to achieve? I like the idea of hero points to give the players more control.
Hi, Frank --

I think this is the real question, and you're not really answering it. To me, at least, a reward system is some kind of carrot; it incentivizes certain play activities, as well as setting up the pace of development of some game resource.

What kinds of activities do you want to reward? What sort of pace do you want to set?

I have a question about d20 -- I haven't played it.  Do the various classes all level at the same bars these days?  When I was last playing D&D, you'd have like seventh level magic users with ninth level fighters and tenth level theives...or something like that, because of the different progressions.  And it was all good.  And even, a fourth and seventh level fighter could adventure together as long as the expectations were set realistically.  Has that changed?  I'm wondering why it's bad to let them level at different rates -- not that I'm arguing for it, just curious.

So xp will be static and equal -- the party will level together.  And keys or something will produce hero points that can be used for cool effects and mortality aversion.  What else?

Frank's not going to play those other games because, as he has written in the past, he doesn't know how to find players for them.  Now, I know Frank in person, and I think the real deal is that he doesn't particularly want to play those games.  I think he wants the good parts of the 'good ole days' with some modern tweaks.  And I think Sean's right that he's onto something.  But I do think he wants to play the "killing monsters and dodging traps" game, but with some fun and intelligent veneer.  Is that fair Frank?

As if there's not games for that. Play Donjon.

Chris Weeks - yes, D20 has unfied the XP scale so all characters level at the same rate. At the same time, they've made character building a much more interesting exercise, because instead of the old style multi-classing where you were a fighter/magic user and split your XP 50-50, each level, you choose which class to level up in (so a 3rd level character might be a fighter 3, a wizard 3, a fighter 2/wizard 1, or a fighter 1/wizard 2). Additionally they've added skill choices, feat (special ability) choices, and attribute increases. They've also formalized point buy for attributes (though you can still roll).

You're also right in that I want to run that old style killing monsters and dodging traps (well, not so much dodging traps these days), but with a little something on top tying in together. In fact that's essentially what I used in my recruiting pitch. I wouldn't quite say that I'm not interested in "those other games" but you're right in that at least right now, I have little interest in running them (I do actually have an interest in playing them). (And actually, an area where I do have an interest in doing something different from that old school D&D is the LEGO pirate gaming that I've been running at cons).

So take it as a given that I'm not looking for Nar play, and I don't want to sneak up on it either.

That being said, if everyone gets the same XP (and really, I don't see much of a gap between everyone gets 300 XP because the party defeated 4 CR 3 monsters and everyone gets 300 XP because that's the rate I want to hand out XP - the main difference is possibly that with the XP by CR the players have some control over pacing by trying to be more efficient at play [however that might manifest itself]). But fundamentally the XP is not an individual reward system, so the individuals are getting rewarded somewhere else (or am I wrong there - is that player ability to optimize for faster XP important?).

Now I really like hero points, even if they wind up mostly as get out of death free cards. The old days sucked with divine intervention where I rolled percentile dice and if I grooved on the number that came up and I liked the character, the character was saved and if not... Also, despite my interest in "realistic combat" (whatever the heck that is with some characters manifesting firebombs and flying sprytes and dragons and whatnot), I like the idea of hero points allowing PCs to stretch the rules somehow.

With all of this, I think the reason the counters never really came into play in our play so far (once the spryte had to accept -2 XP for coward to fly into a melee to heal a PC, but this was countered by a +5 XP for healing at personal risk) is that we are not interested in addressing premise. I think I grok what Nar play is all about, and I think I understand just how those keys work for Nar play. But Nar is not what we're about. But that doesn't mean that the idea of the player defining just what it is he should be rewarded for doesn't have merit in Gam or Sim play.

Stepping back a bit - I think leveling up is part of the reward cycle, but it feels flat with everyone getting flat XP. The previous campaign started to fall apart when I instituted flat XP. Though part of the problem there was that I was giving absent players XP also, but if there is a goal to keep everyone the same level, and there are players who are absent with any frequency, you need to give them XP even though they aren't there. One of the big problems - characters became throw away (since you could start a new PC at the same level). So purely flat XP doesn't work. So that's why I'm looking to hero points to be the non-flat part of the reward system.

I also have to feel that somehow I'm doing something right. I've got more dedicated players than I've perhaps ever had. I've got players telling me at the end of the session that they had a good time. A player choose to play Tuesday night before having to get up early for a flight to GenCon (ok, maybe he was just getting an early start on the low sleep mode of con attendees).

Chris (Bankuei) - interesting thought to reward everyone. So your suggestion is use the keys, but when the healer does something worth 5 XP, everyone gets 5 XP? That does allow the players to have control over the rate (by being efficient) PLUS they get to define the type of activity that will be rewarded. But Iago does have a point that the keys do have to mesh with the module in play (or inform the choice of module, but I have to admit that part isn't working for me. The players keys have not really helped me choose modules or encounters at all, perhaps partly because I don't operate on that level of detail when prepping. One phase of D&D I never got into was the plotted campaign arcs where I knew everything that was going to happen, in my play, I present a module, and let the players make of it what they will with it (the only caveat being that if they choose not to engage the module at all, we might have to skip the session, or I'll be running something mighty off the cuff [which is a lot harder with D20 than the systems I used in the past]).

Sean: would the wife respond to excited players? I'm really not sure. I'm honestly somewhat at a loss how to reach out to her. I have talked to her and her husband some, and I understand her learning disabilities are quite a serious impact. I do know that it's easy to put too much pressure on her and have her freeze up (in the previous campaign, she had a translator character and a translation opportunity came up, she froze up when put on the spot, and didn't even loosen up when we told her all she had to do was say "I'll translate everything they say" and then we just talk as a group with the understanding she's translating). From out joint and failed attempt to play in a Fudge game, I know that one of the big reasons the couple is playing with me is that I accomodate them. As Kerstin requested, I may start a separate thread for more discussion along those lines (hmm, Kerstin, is this what you actually wanted a new thread for? The wife isn't exactly a new player, she has played in a variety of games for at least two years now).

Chris G (ok, folks, can we have a few more Chris's here...:-): the players choose their own keys. The players have changed up their keys, but we're still having trouble getting definitions. Clearly if we continue with something like this, I need to freeze the game, and resolve as a group whether we want the keys at all, and if so, how they are going to work. I am worried about passive color keys, but so long as the player has to make an effort, and that effort adds to the game atmosphere, I'm cool. The way the player is playing scary, it's working good (it actually is driving into a sort of over the top metagame atmosphere that is part of what I like about the game - I'm not describing it well at all, but what's happening is exactly why I really miss player J - his atmospheric posturing was what immediately made me want him in my games, and actually, where the young couple does come out is in this atmospheric banter).

Oh, and why use D20? Because it really is easier to recruit players for D20. If I had my druthers, I'd be playing Cold Iron (though I will admit that I'm not sure Cold Iron cuts it any more - perhaps it does need a rewrite), or Rune Quest, though I also have to admit that I enjoy building characters in D20. Maybe some other time I'll look into some of the newer games.

I think I'm coming to the conclusion that things aren't all that broke, or at least aren't very far from being fixed. I'm thinking a little "we need to talk about how this hero point reward system is really going to work, and what we're trying to do with it so we're all on the same page" will help things. It's possible the answer is just return to standard D&D XP, but my gut feeling is the players do like the idea (and part of the problem may just be that they've never had the power to define what things they get rewarded for in the past).

Frank

Hi Frank,

That's pretty close to what I'm talking about.  What I would do (take, leave, use parts as you see fit):

1) Reward the whole group for the actions of any individual, but divide the points up (reward right away, scene by scene, also).
2) Multiply the Sweet20 xp by 100 and run it through the normal D&D xp progression
-Because 100 xp is easier to divide 3 ways than 1 point
-Because D20 players like to see big numbers
-And finally, it slows progression at higher levels, which is something a lot of D&D/D20 players actually prefer... they like to work for it
3) Change their Keys from rewarding an activity to rewarding address of theme or emotion...

That is, rewarding Scary, Healing, or Bloodlust really doesn't do much than simply lock players into repeating activities for their characters.  Rewarding stuff like, "Compassion", "Vow of Revenge", or "Vow to never turn my back on my friends", is a lot more meaningful.  That is, if that's what you really want with this. 

4) Change Keys to ones that better fit the module (and remind players that they CAN change Keys during play if necessary).

Chris

PS- I would still reward monster mashing as well, otherwise, just play TSOY.

Frank, I realize the discussion has moved pretty far afield, but I was wondering if you'd checked out my Arcana Evolved (well, actually Arcana Unearthed) to TSOY adaptation.  Admittedly it's unfinished, but I think it manages to hit a few of the thematic bases, and there are some Species Keys that might work for you--

http://random.average-bear.com/TSOY/LandOfTheDiamondThrone

I have most of the notes I need to finish it--info on adapting the main cultures and so on--but I haven't had a chance to really sit down and type 'em up.  Please note that if your gang are Arcana Unearthed purists I've taken some liberties.

Chis, I'll have to think about that. You're sort of suggesting rewarding Nar play, which might be incoherent and might smack of sneaking up on mode, but maybe I'm misreading. I actually prefer the smaller numbers of XP (D20 really could have divided by 100, certainly by 10. Giving someone 10 XP when you need 100 is almost meaningless). I also actually like the steady progression of advancement. D&D used to have a problem of going stale at high levels because advancement was just too infrequent (and then all the poor fighter got was a couple hit points). I've even come around to the idea that a level every 4 game sessions is ok, it's nice to know that a year long campaign can progress into decently high levels, and a two year campaign could hope to hit 20th level (it's always seemed odd that D&D had these high level spells that you never actually got to use [except when the DM used them against you) because no one ever got to 18th level (ok, I did actually have a campaign reach 16th level characters I think - but that was my mult-year 8+ hours a week high school campaign - I've never even come close since).

But a thought - I think I'm looking for ways to reward more than just the standard combat activities, but also to allow players a way to mechanically express what is interesting to them. Will it really work? I'm not sure.

James - yes, I did see your AU/TSOY bits. I haven't pulled stuff down lately so I think I only got Faen keys and I've noticed you do have some more up there. I'll have to look again because definitely we could benefit from more examples of keys. We're definitely not purists since I'm using Judge's Guild's Wilderlands of High Fantasy setting and warping it and AE to fit. The giants play much less of a role in my campaign.

This discussion has been really helpful to me. I've nailed why the counters haven't been meaningfull to us. What I think I'd be most interested in now would be some ideas for keys that might work.

Frank

ffilz wrote:
This discussion has been really helpful to me. I've nailed why the counters haven't been meaningfull to us. What I think I'd be most interested in now would be some ideas for keys that might work.

ffilz wrote:
James - yes, I did see your AU/TSOY bits. I haven't pulled stuff down lately so I think I only got Faen keys and I've noticed you do have some more up there. I'll have to look again..

ffilz wrote:
But a thought - I think I'm looking for ways to reward more than just the standard combat activities, but also to allow players a way to mechanically express what is interesting to them. Will it really work? I'm not sure.

I'm seriously tempted to go to standard XP calculations for combat and traps (with the note that D&D does allow for non-combat XP based on the challenge of any combat that is avoided by non-combat actions).

I think I'll stick with something like keys being individual, and granting individual hero point awards, I will work with the players to have keys that work for their characters, and are reasonably likely to come up (including my actually making an effort to have them come up), but recognizing that different players may have different levels of motivation here (which is fine so long as the key idea doesn't dominate the game).

Thoughts on what such keys might look like are still welcome, but they really are going to have to come from the players. If the idea is for them to define their character, picking from a woefully short list of examples isn't going to work, but having some good examples will be important.

Also, if anyone has a suggestion for what to call these since they aren't keys in the way TSOY/Sweet 20 defines them since I think having a counter for Nar enablement is not necessary for our game.

Frank