After reading the recent(ish) thread on HP reward systems I've been thinking a lot about advancement in HQ.

In general I like the system presented in the book. Many players seem to like the granularity of the system in fine-tuning their ability ratings, and there is a nice tension between spending hero points on bumps or saving them to buy / improve your abilities. All that works great.

Where I think the system falls down is in the way it handles larger-scale changes to a character, such as finding Stormbringer, spending five years in a war off-camera, or renouncing your former life as an intergalactic assassin to become a zen buddhist. Generally these sorts of things just end up having lots of hero points thrown at them in some way, which I don't think is very satisfying.

So, here are a couple of ideas I've been toying with:

1) Dramatic Uplifts

When dramatically appropriate (after the conclusion of a big fight or story arc, for example) the narrator steps outside the normal advancement rules and lets everyone choose a new ability at 5m, or a new keyword, or whatever, to reflect the impact of these events on the character. For example:

- After the battle Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas all take the ability 'Hero of Helm's Deep' at 5m.
- At the end of Episode V Luke Skywalker gains the Jedi Knight keyword.
- As the Shadow War escalates Sheridan gains command of the White Star fleet.

These bonus abilities should be left for the players to define rather than being imposed from above by the narrator. They should be given to all players equally and should probably be pretty rare.

2) Transforming Abilities

Instead of buying a new ability from scratch you can spend 1 HP to transform an exisiting ability into something else (with the same rating). This should generally reflect dramatic changes in a character's personality or relationships with others but just about anything can be transformed given the right set of circumstances. Charging a token HP stops characters being in a constant state of flux and reinforces the gravity of such a change. Some examples:

- When Saruman falls he transforms his 'White Wizard' keyword into 'Saruman of Many Colours'.
- During Episode V Leia's 'Annoyed by that Scruffy-Looking Mercenary' becomes 'Love Han Solo'. 
- Susan Ivanova swaps 'Loved By Marcus Cole' for 'Tormented By Guilt' after his final sacrifice.

So... any thoughts?

soviet

We change the name of relationship scores all the time.

In fact, in the section on relationships the rules say that this is kosher - in fact I don't think there's any HP cost at all.

Further, there's another clause in the rules that permits all of this, though I find it a bit problematic. That is, somewhere in the narrating section it suggests that the narrator has some sort of broad power in play such that it includes being able to simply award any ability at any time to any player. So if you consider this a rule, then everything above is simply a good method by which to alter characters that sticks to this rule.

I like this sort of thing myself. I don't like that the rulebook leaves it as vague as it does. But if you've come up with some system that you'll use yourself for this, I think it's a good idea. What I object to is the narrator just doing this sort of thing on whim...it makes the HP system of advancement seem redundant. In fact, what some people do these days is simply ignore HP for advancement entirely, and just advance abilities based on general consensus.

I prefer the balance mentioned, however, between spending and bumping. So I like to have rigorous systems for things like this. Here's my system:

• During normal play, the normal HP system applies. I also have some house rules about costs for certain things, but that's really ancillary to the discussion here. I think of this as dramatic development. Which is not to say that it can't be representative of things that are happening in the sessions - they can, and usually are. But simply that I find it fine for players to add to any ability at any time for any reason using HP. If they want to say something about how their character has been practicing, or long ago learned something, that's fine, but I don't require any explanation at all.
• During "down times," where a character would have time to grow in ability, I use something like the "saga system" from the rules meaning that I tend to give out a few points to add to keyword levels based on what has happened in play. That is, if the downtime has been sitting around peacefully farming for years, I'll probably give few, while being in a war for a couple months may give more. I also give out a few HP so that the player can tinker with a few abilities if they like. I think of this as less dramatic, and more "refactoring" the character so that they're appropriate to their background. Really no different than what you'd do if you created the character from scratch at that moment. You're just making the character appropriate to their current situation.
• As for "Transforming" as I've said, this is per the rules for relationships, but I extrapolate this to say that if it makes sense for other abilities, then it makes sense to do that for them too. So, basically it's like you've got it, I allow any transformation that makes sense (though I don't advertise this a lot, or do it often). This may be against a narrow construction view of the rules, but, if so, I think it's a good modification.



So the only real difference in my play from what you have is that I wouldn't give such a bonus at the end of Helm's Deep - though if that was followed by significant downtime, they might be able to get the ability, or they might be able to get it from HP that I gave as the result of the battle. So, really, very little difference here, other than the fact that I don't often give out bonus HP, and do downtime only rarely.

In other words, I think what you have will work pretty well. Instead of giving a new ability at 5W, I'd suggest giving out the 13 HP that this represents, and letting players do with it what they will. While the book does suggest that something like HW's "Directed HP" expenditures may be merited, I have no problem with players squirreling HP away if they really want to. The expenditures later can be thought of as "lessons learned from Helm's Deep."

Just a thought.

BTW, I've considered adding the rule to have a one HP surcharge on changes, and I think it's a good one. That is, I prefer that the player do the considering than to have the question of when it can change be based on narrator fiat. I think I'll probably institute that myself. The real benefit, as I see it, is that it's a mechanical cue to the fact that it can be done. That is, if you charge for it, it gains a percieved value, and I think players will do it more often (right now my players don't do it a ton).

Mike

In fact, in the section on relationships the rules say that this is kosher - in fact I don't think there's any HP cost at all.

I like this sort of thing myself. I don't like that the rulebook leaves it as vague as it does.
But if you've come up with some system that you'll use yourself for this, I think it's a good idea. What I object to is the narrator just doing this sort of thing on whim...it makes the HP system of advancement seem redundant. In fact, what some people do these days is simply ignore HP for advancement entirely, and just advance abilities based on general consensus.

I prefer the balance mentioned, however, between spending and bumping. So I like to have rigorous systems for things like this. Here's my system:
During normal play, the normal HP system applies. I also have some house rules about costs for certain things, but that's really ancillary to the discussion here. I think of this as dramatic development. Which is not to say that it can't be representative of things that are happening in the sessions - they can, and usually are. But simply that I find it fine for players to add to any ability at any time for any reason using HP. If they want to say something about how their character has been practicing, or long ago learned something, that's fine, but I don't require any explanation at all.

During "down times," where a character would have time to grow in ability, I use something like the "saga system" from the rules meaning that I tend to give out a few points to add to keyword levels based on what has happened in play. That is, if the downtime has been sitting around peacefully farming for years, I'll probably give few, while being in a war for a couple months may give more. I also give out a few HP so that the player can tinker with a few abilities if they like. I think of this as less dramatic, and more "refactoring" the character so that they're appropriate to their background. Really no different than what you'd do if you created the character from scratch at that moment. You're just making the character appropriate to their current situation.
As for "Transforming" as I've said, this is per the rules for relationships, but I extrapolate this to say that if it makes sense for other abilities, then it makes sense to do that for them too. So, basically it's like you've got it, I allow any transformation that makes sense (though I don't advertise this a lot, or do it often). This may be against a narrow construction view of the rules, but, if so, I think it's a good modification.

In other words, I think what you have will work pretty well. Instead of giving a new ability at 5W, I'd suggest giving out the 13 HP that this represents, and letting players do with it what they will. While the book does suggest that something like HW's "Directed HP" expenditures may be merited, I have no problem with players squirreling HP away if they really want to. The expenditures later can be thought of as "lessons learned from Helm's Deep."

BTW, I've considered adding the rule to have a one HP surcharge on changes, and I think it's a good one. That is, I prefer that the player do the considering than to have the question of when it can change be based on narrator fiat. I think I'll probably institute that myself. The real benefit, as I see it, is that it's a mechanical cue to the fact that it can be done. That is, if you charge for it, it gains a percieved value, and I think players will do it more often (right now my players don't do it a ton).

lightcastle wrote:
I would probably stick the "pay 1 HP" thing just as it fits the whole idea of allowing the player to indicate this is dramatically important by how they spend their points.

In fact, what some people do these days is simply ignore HP for advancement entirely, and just advance abilities based on general consensus.

Which is what I do (although I basically make people pay 1 point for the privilege) but I don't really like it because, as you say, it makes it redundant. I happen to like the idea of having the whole trade off and choice about bumping vs advancement and what have you. But I've never quite been satisfied with finding a way to do it that seems to work well.

OK, I can see that. Do you include the "part of play, not in play" costs or are you saying here you really just don't bother with that?

It is usually harder to see/explain those transformations in other types of traits (except possibly personality ones, although I usually prefer to let the player take a new, conflicting one, and then let them war with each other.)