Hero Points/Fate Points for BRP

[Trifletraxor]

How about a more 'organic' approach, letting the story tell itself? After all, no matter how much potential someone has there is always the chance that said potential will be cut short by a stray arrow or bullet or even by being in the wrong place at the wrong time. No rhyme or reason in real life. And in my experience at least, the best rpg experiences are the ones where the players have no idea whether or not it is going to be the last for a particular character (mirroring real life or a good story, the best of which mirror real life IMO). Why not let the story tell itself, whatever the consequences? It would seem to be just a matter of taste, of what sort of story one wants to tell. In which case both the use of fate points or not are valid approaches. Also, I have noticed that some people tend to invest more in their characters than others; I myself have always looked at my own PCs as playing pieces or pawns, and their passing may be a little disappointing (best DEX I ever rolled!) but then I just shrug and get on with the game. Use of fate points of any sort change the whole experience and not in a good way, to me. I much prefer to let the story develop as it will (I figure that is what the randomness of the dice rolling does) and don't have a desire to dabble in what occurs as a result of that primary means of determining those occurrances in-game.

I feel GM fudging is appropriate in certain situations, where the PC otherwise would get killed instantly with no say on the outcome. I then make care taht the player do not know I'm fudging.

In my games it's often starting characters who die first. Not because their worse, but because the player hasn't got attached to it yet and so is not as carefull as he/she could be.

Hero Points as an optional system is no problem for me. It seems like many people use them allready. I am however strongly against having them as part of the default, as BRP have allways been a "deadly" and realistic game compared to the rest.

(trying to break up the old thread into new ones )

Sverre.

[Lord Twig]

I completely agree. They are fine as an optional rule, but they are not core BRP in my mind.

I see GM fudging as a tool for dramatic license. Other's don't like it because it allows for GM abuse. At least, I guess that's why they don't like it. The opponents of GM fudging can probably state their case better than I.

[TRose]

I am in total agreement that the GM should fudge at times. Otherwise what do you do when say 5 out of your 6 players are having a good night using their skills and everything and then the 6 player does something really stupid that if you played it out would result in the party getting wiped. I think we all seen fools that throw rocks at a T-Rex, insult a Troll Priestess in her fortress, Try to attack a whole Lunar regiment , etc, and one should not punish the rest of the party for the action of one person.

[lawrence.whitaker]

I'd say that GM fudging is essential, from time to time. I've had carefully worked-out scenarios completely trashed through unlucky GM dice rolls. You have a decision to make: rewrite the scenario on the fly as a result, or fudge/ignore the result. The former can be fun to do, but sometimes the latter is better - as long as its used judiciously and the players are aware that sometimes it will happen to keep the action moving.

Hero/Fate points aren't core BRP, but the Luck Roll, which sort of amounts to a similar thing (but isn't a finite, managable resource) has been there since Ringworld and probably before. Luck Rolls are good and very useful, but require careful moderation to ensure consistency, usually because it requires GM approval. I've come a cropper myself where I've allowed a Luck roll in one situation but disallowed it or not offered it later in the same or similar, just because I've forgotten what I did earlier.

Hero/Fate points place that capability in the hands of the players which ensures a certain degree of consistency. And, as a finite resource, players do (or should) think carefully before using them. I use them in MRQ and have used them in a BRP/HQ/Bushido hybrid I ran for Glorantha a few years back. They worked well and weren't abused. I'm a big fan of them. More so than Luck rolls, I think.

[RMS]

Originally Posted by lawrence.whitaker

Hero/Fate points aren't core BRP, but the Luck Roll, which sort of amounts to a similar thing (but isn't a finite, managable resource) has been there since Ringworld and probably before.

For the record, Luck rolls have been around since RQII. I just mention this because I've read several posts saying that "Luck rolls have been around since..." lately. RQII also had characteristic rolls for all 6 other characteristics introduced. They varied from 1x to 5x the characteristic chosen by the GM, rather than the set 5x on the character sheet in later, simplified BRP implementations.

[lawrence.whitaker]

Originally Posted by RMS

For the record, Luck rolls have been around since RQII. I just mention this because I've read several posts saying that "Luck rolls have been around since..." lately. RQII also had characteristic rolls for all 6 other characteristics introduced. They varied from 1x to 5x the characteristic chosen by the GM, rather than the set 5x on the character sheet in later, simplified BRP implementations.

Yes, quite right. Luck rolls are mentioned in the RQ2 appendices under POWER in section A; but not indexed and certainly not up there as part of the core character generation. I do know Ringworld had Luck as a key part of the character design rather than something tucked away at the back of the book, hence my reference to it. Back when I played RQ2 we never used them, and they didn't form part of the Stormbringer core rules either, until Elric! appeared in 1992.

The original BRP booklet has Luck as a part of the base system, but its figured as POW x5. RQ2 did clarify that different multipliers could be used for the Luck roll, depending on circumstances.

[Trifletraxor]

I've only used luck rolls for non-combat related stuff, fumbling the climb roll with a certain death drop, etc.

How have you guys used it?

Sverre.

[badcat]

As I have stated in another thread, I do fudge a little sometimes when killing a character off over a simple mistake would be just too cruel (or sometimes when the dice are just being too contrary, there is a tiny increment of danger and things just GO WRONG, if you know what I mean). I prefer to do it that way because I think the game is more fun when they (the players) can never be sure of a positive outcome. I very rarely fudge, though. Most likely when a simple trap kills a PC or some such. Maybe once a session, sometimes twice. Nothing like the frequency a fate point system would get used. I also think fate points are a perfectly valid option, just not for me. If I were to play in a group that had a GM who used them, I would just disregard them and let fate take its course. I don't see any conflict...unless someone insisted on their use in a game I was running.

[lawrence.whitaker]

Originally Posted by Trifletraxor

I've only used luck rolls for non-combat related stuff, fumbling the climb roll with a certain death drop, etc.

How have you guys used it?

Sverre.

Pretty much in the same way. However if a player has come up with a combo or move that is dramatically brilliant, or just makes me laugh, I've had them make a Luck roll to see if the character pulls it off.

[Enpeze]

Luck rolls are good for many situations. (even in combat sometimes) I use them in POW x1, x3, x5 etc. variants. (depending on the situation) If 2 persons compete with their luck, I compare their POW on the resistance table.