WFRP Style Fate points in BRP?

[Turloigh]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

Easy, each point costs a skill check. Paid at the end of the adventure. So if someone wants to use 5 or 6 points they have to uncheck 5 or 6 boxes at the end of the night.

That would not be my preferred way to do it.

IME, some characters will often have more boxes checked than others, because they have most of the skills that are useful in most adventures (frex, the guy with all the high perception skills). Especially in the long run.

If Fate or Hero points are tied to the check boxes, some characters will inevitably have an advantage.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by Turloigh

That would not be my preferred way to do it.

Mine either. But it is a way.

Originally Posted by Turloigh

IME, some characters will often have more boxes checked than others, because they have most of the skills that are useful in most adventures (frex, the guy with all the high perception skills). Especially in the long run.

If Fate or Hero points are tied to the check boxes, some characters will inevitably have an advantage.

If some characters are getting more checks than others then they inevitable will have an advantage anyway. The problem isn't with sacrificing check boxes for hero points, but with people getting significantly more checks than others.

They shouldn't. A GM should try to make all the character equally useful. Especially in the long run. Otherwise people are getting penalties if they stray from whatever "works" for a GM. For example, if most people are playing combat oriented characters and one guy plays a scholar, the GM should make sure that the scholar gets as many chases for a check mark as the fighter types.

Basically in BRP a lot of this should balance out, because as skills get higher improvement slows and the lower skilled characters can start to close the gap. THe guys with the 30% skills do get the checks and tend to go up.

[Turloigh]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

If some characters are getting more checks than others then they inevitable will have an advantage anyway.

Theoretically, but it doesn't always work out that way.

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

The problem isn't with sacrificing check boxes for hero points, but with people getting significantly more checks than others.

IMHO, not as much as it sounds. There are plenty of other ways to reward characters. Advancement-wise, time and money for training are equally important (I come from a RQ3 background). Other characters will concentrate on acquiring spells (or powers).

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

They shouldn't. A GM should try to make all the character equally useful. Especially in the long run. Otherwise people are getting penalties if they stray from whatever "works" for a GM. For example, if most people are playing combat oriented characters and one guy plays a scholar, the GM should make sure that the scholar gets as many chases for a check mark as the fighter types.

I may be misunderstanding what "chases" means - but combat isn't a problem, since everyone eventually gets his or her skill check.

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

Basically in BRP a lot of this should balance out, because as skills get higher improvement slows and the lower skilled characters can start to close the gap. THe guys with the 30% skills do get the checks and tend to go up.

And here's the catch.

The guy with the high skills succeeds most of the time and gets most of the checks, and therefore the most hero points, although he wouldn't succeed with the experience roll. The guy with low skills doesn't get as many, but his experience rolls will most likely succeed.

And this is where, AFAICT, advancement in BRP games balances out (not with the number of skill checks). Most GMs I know are not going to worry too much if one PC increases five skills by 6% while I've failed all my experience rolls after the session. Hero points however are potential lifesavers and require close attention.

That said, I realize now I've started a rather esoteric discussion that probably few readers are interested in. And again, in theory, you are completely right.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by Turloigh

And here's the catch.

The guy with the high skills succeeds most of the time and gets most of the checks, and therefore the most hero points, although he wouldn't succeed with the experience roll. The guy with low skills doesn't get as many, but his experience rolls will most likely succeed.

About the catch. No not in play. The reason is that character get multiple opportunities to each checks during the night, but only get one check for any one skill. So, for instance, if a PC is firing a bow at 25% but doesn't hit until the third of fourth round, he is still getting the same number of checks as the guy with the 80% skill.

Since checks are earned for use under stress, it is also possible that a low skilled character might get a check in a situation where a high skilled character might not. For instance a flight instructor with 90% skill probably wouldn't count taking off in a Cessna with a student onboard to be stressful, but the student with a 25% skill probably would consider his tie at the controls to be stressful.

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

Another way to do "Hero Points" that would not get out of hand.

Easy, each point costs a skill check. Paid at the end of the adventure. So if someone wants to use 5 or 6 points they have to uncheck 5 or 6 boxes at the end of the night.

I've found that in practice games that conflate experience increases with hero point style expenditures tend to produce some potentially serious social dynamics problems.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by Nightshade

I've found that in practice games that conflate experience increases with hero point style expenditures tend to produce some potentially serious social dynamics problems.

Translation: Angry players?

The old Mayfair DC system used Hero Points for both purposes but I was a MArvel fan so I never saw how that worked in practice.

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

Translation: Angry players?

The old Mayfair DC system used Hero Points for both purposes but I was a MArvel fan so I never saw how that worked in practice.

It was more complicated than that, but that was the practical long term result. What happened is it tended to breed for two mindsets:

1. Don't use the hero points because you don't want to fall behind. This meant a double-or-nothing philosophy where players who got lucky got ahead where as those who didn't got trashed. Since those with higher abilities tend to need this sort of thing somewhat less, this could turn into a rich-get-richer effect.

2. Don't spend them on experience because you might need them for emergencies. This meant that those players never advanced.

And by the by, DCH was exactly the game that taught me this.

Now, if you get to decide at the point where events happen to use future advancement, this is not as big a problem.

A bigger one is that the value of an advancement roll isn't symmetrical throughout the course of a BRP character's career; at the bottom end, they're hard to come by, and are most likely to get you actual advancement; at the top, they're easy to get, but don't usually actually produce advancement. This means it gets more and more painless to use one this way at exactly the period in one's character life one is least likely to need it.

[frogspawner]

About a Defence/Luck skill used to avoid damage...

Originally Posted by Nightshade

That depends on how Defense is handled. In most versions of BRP I'm familiar with, it had to be broken up amidst attackers in some way or another, so numbers quickly diluted it badly.

That's why the version of Defence I'm talking about isn't divided. Just roll it, full-value, against any hit and reduce the damage accordingly.

Originally Posted by Turloigh

Most GMs I know are not going to worry too much if one PC increases five skills by 6% while I've failed all my experience rolls after the session. Hero points however are potential lifesavers and require close attention.
That said, I realize now I've started a rather esoteric discussion that probably few readers are interested in.

Just the right level of esoteric-ness for me, thanks! I have had to field complaints from players about exactly this point - Hero Points (aka Defence points round my way) are too valuable to submit to the vagaries of increase-rolls. And they were right, too - so now I have to just award them, straight, without the usual mechanic. But, as I give them as rewards for good roleplaying, I think the linearity is fair.

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by frogspawner

About a Defence/Luck skill used to avoid damage...


That's why the version of Defence I'm talking about isn't divided. Just roll it, full-value, against any hit and reduce the damage accordingly.

Even with that I'm leery in a linear die roll game like BRP until you get so good that you're making the roll almost all the time; just the fact you have to roll multiple times makes it mathematically almost certain to screw up soon.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by Nightshade

Even with that I'm leery in a linear die roll game like BRP until you get so good that you're making the roll almost all the time; just the fact you have to roll multiple times makes it mathematically almost certain to screw up soon.

THe thing I don't like is that such a method isn't selective. It is just as likely to work or not when you really need it as at any other time.

Since the idea was to allow for a more cinematic/less lethal game, I don't think it would really help, since it is just a random factor.

Also, since it is an improvable skill, it would mean that the fledgling heroes who need it wouldn't have it at good scores. The master warriors who don't need it, would be the ones with very high scores.

Plus someone with a 95% defense on top of a 95% parry or dodge is going to be sort of boring. There is only a 0.25% chance of hitting the guy.

An RQ2 style (sbutract defense form attack) is a bit better, but you still have the problem of making fights against flunkies not worth playing.

I think any sort of soulition needs to be of the limited number of uses variety to keep things intestesing. A pool that can get used up is more dramatic, espeically since it can be tracked while getting used up, than a dice mechanic that will turn a hit into a statsitical abnormality.