You know, we're going to be a hard to hit party. When you can point to the unarmed mage and say he's as nearly as hard to hit as a guy in scale mail and low man on the armor pool so far, that's a pretty sturdy group.
ANd that's the musing of the moment.
Dracos
Random musing number 2:
I think I'm the only one playing a human. I think I'm also the only one playing a guy character.
Dracos
You're probably the only human, but you're not the only guy. Rat's listed as a guy in his sheet >_>
Quote from: "Dracos"You know, we're going to be a hard to hit party. When you can point to the unarmed mage and say he's as nearly as hard to hit as a guy in scale mail and low man on the armor pool so far, that's a pretty sturdy group.
ANd that's the musing of the moment.
Dracos
I noticed, but I'm cool with that. I can cope with low AC PCs; there's more than one way to skin an adventurer!
See, this is where in real life I could grin manaically and make reference to all sorts of evil things. Oh well, I'll just have to settle with two words: Rust Monsters.
Quote from: "MercForHire"You're probably the only human, but you're not the only guy. Rat's listed as a guy in his sheet >_>
I'm both unsurprised and surprised. I figured Rat would be one of the girls and Merc would be the manly conquerer.
Huh.
My current musing is that I'm going to get to play with all sorts of weird utility spells.
Like 'Item'. :D
Quote from: "Anastasia"I'm both unsurprised and surprised. I figured Rat would be one of the girls and Merc would be the manly conquerer.
We had too many warriors I thought, which is where I would have played a guy. Actually, any class outside of thief and cleric I'd pick male. >_>
Quote from: "MercForHire"Quote from: "Anastasia"I'm both unsurprised and surprised. I figured Rat would be one of the girls and Merc would be the manly conquerer.
We had too many warriors I thought, which is where I would have played a guy. Actually, any class outside of thief and cleric I'd pick male. >_>
No female mages?
Damn, I half figured you might go for a Makoto mage or an Ami mage. Go go go Lighting Bolt at level 3! <_<
Nah. I have this odd thing against wizard classes. I'm not exactly sure why considering I'm playing a magical girl in your SM game, but whatever, I'm just odd that way I guess. ^_^;
*Snickers*
Joking aside, I'm so tempted to give you a Hammer of Thunderbolts or a Ring of Ice Control it's not funny.
Quote from: "Anastasia"Quote from: "Dracos"You know, we're going to be a hard to hit party. When you can point to the unarmed mage and say he's as nearly as hard to hit as a guy in scale mail and low man on the armor pool so far, that's a pretty sturdy group.
ANd that's the musing of the moment.
Dracos
I noticed, but I'm cool with that. I can cope with low AC PCs; there's more than one way to skin an adventurer!
See, this is where in real life I could grin manaically and make reference to all sorts of evil things. Oh well, I'll just have to settle with two words: Rust Monsters.
EWWWW.
Anyhow, more seriously though, it actually helps a lot with the epic feel of it. You can fling lots of small grunts alongside actual enemies without the worry that they'll be a significant change to the balance of the fight between the players and the enemies, thus making for more dramatic villians than "You encounter 3-7 villians" =P
This is sort of annoying to do when the weak enemies have a good chance of connecting and doing damage.
Dracos
That's true as well. Some cannon fodder that can be distracting but not a real threat is worth considering.
Gob gob?
Thing is, if you toss along 4 grunts alongside three ogres, that's 4 extra chances to roll a critical every round. ;_;
Plus more chance of getting flanked too ^_^
meh. *shrugs*
If it truly ends up being a problem, Dune can deal with it.
Dracos
Reviving this old thread to comment on things following last session.
I talked a bit about some of this with Rat and Drac, mostly with Drac since we were both in the same situation. If you want the log of my chat with Drac, I'm willing to put it up.
Some of the stuff I'm waiting to see what else you give awards on tomorrow morning before mentioning it, but here's most of it. I'm falling asleep as I wrote this, and Drac was falling asleep as we talked, so some of it might seem very rant-ish (or hell it might just -be- rantish, screw 'might seem'):
1) (posted in house rules thread too) Would be nice if Saul could do heals somewhat like in 3E, in that he can convert cleric spells into heals. To fit with mythos of Waukeen, he could pay a hefty toll for doing so, so he'd probably carry some cure spells off hand, but still be able to change spells on an emergency.
2) Criticals: On attacks, it's kind of ridiculous how often we've been getting those 1's and 20's. Those 1's and 20's make the game to a crazy degree, and probably having something like 3E would help, especially if we're seasoned adventurers, where chance of a crit fail is something like 1/400 (roll 1 twice of a d20), and a crit pass is better than 1/400, but still not 1/20 (must hit twice to get the crit effect, which is easier as we level, when we also have more HP and can take them better from opponents who get those crits against us).
3) Success vs Failure EXP: Right now, we seem to get exp in a way that if you succeed at something, you get a lot of exp, if you fail at it, you get very little or no exp. To quote Drac: "<SirGavin> Good RPing is good RPing, whether or not you get screwed by the dice."
Would want more encouragement for exp to be given placed on the action taken, not the dice rolled.
Not to say that Darius didn't deserve exp for stumbling onto thieves's den, and a fair bit for it. (Still, did he deserve -that- much? Jeez... see last comment of point 4)
4) Bonus Exp: I know you said in the first exp post you didn't want arguments over it, but it seems to have gotten somewhat unbalanced lately.
<SirGavin> Really, what gets me is that some of the players can be jailed up, in bed diseased and wounded, and still get 10-20 percent more xp than I manage on those sessions.
<SirGavin> It's not so much that stuff isn't done so much as dune is hypersensitive to a couple characters doing stuff.
Example: Elaine and Seryf get exp for talking, but no exp is given for Elaine and Gavin training/sparring?
Also: Skills that used and actions taken were getting from 10-150 exp in the beginning of the game...but are now getting 100-500 exp? What the heck happened that caused the jump?
I also don't know if Iddy's just good at pushing your buttons effectively or what, but he's getting 300-400 points for using class skills (primarily using Serith well), while others are getting 50-100 for their class skills, and this is with Serith being a -bonus- to a bare bones fighter kit essentially.
He doesn't need exp as much to keep up with others, yet is getting quite a bit for using something that's definitely a boon to his class and thus something he -is- going to use a heck of a lot of.
This is sort of a balancing thing to some degree, but it is weird to see him getting so many points for a kit bonus when the rest of us don't do nearly as well with our class skills when we use them. I'm not saying he doesn't deserve points for using Serith well, but like I said, it is weird that he seems to advance so much on Serith exp points.
He's currently about 3000 experience points over the next player, despite missing on that whole last session's combat exp, which balanced out with exp for finding guild admittedly, but still, 3k exp over the next player? Hell, he's -6k- over the lowest exp player.
To be honest, both Drac and I are sorta at this opinion on bonus exp:
* SirGavin is starting to wish we just had team xp. Would rather focus on role playing rather than have a counter in the back of his head of "well, now I'm another 500 behind."
While it's nice being rewarded for roleplaying, the inbalance on it that seems to have taken hold since the first couple of adventures is kinda making it more of an annoyance. It worked okay when the bonus exp awards were small, but with them as huge as they are...like drac said, I'm also starting to wish we just had team xp, and I'll roleplay for my own sake, not trying to get points to stay even with everyone else.
5) Sessions: We call the game weekly, and meet once a week. Occassionally, like today, we have everyone around and we meet and continue the game session. That's good. Occassionally, however, other players get individualized sessions, which rack up exp from actions and RP'ing...and screws up those who don't get those sessions.
Saul+Darius got one session, Darius+Seryf got a separate session. They got combat exp in addition to RP exp. Where were Gavin and Elaine? Doing RP stuff...that didn't seem to garner them much RP exp either, really. Well, that or doing nothing too and just sleeping or whatever. Dunno really. Time seems to have flown by with no development from that time.
Not so much that I'm bitching about not getting exp, as much as that it doesn't seem fair that Drac and I are getting less exp for getting less gaming sessions. Hrm...actually, I suppose that is bitching. Still!
<SirGavin> Really, the other sessions thing is a problem not just for experience, but also for cooperativeness.
* Elaine nods.
<SirGavin> I mean, it's a definite feeling that the GM pays much more attention to those clammoring for extra sessions.
So to be honest, both Drac and I want to 'clammor for an extra session' for just the two of us (or individualized sessions, whatever). Pay us attention! >_>
Really? I can't add much to this...simply that I brought the Serith exp thing up with Dune right after the session.
I actually thought I was wandering out alone on this in a bad mood of sorts. >_>;;
Since it is 2:30, I'll just throw in the fact I'm sorta in agreeance with the points brought up.
I guess it stings a bit more with Drac and I (Drac more than me, I guess) sitting waaaay behind...with the hardest exp tables next to Saul. Still yeah, it seems like Darius can drag an awful lot of exp straight from Serith, when she's basically a bonus in exchange for equipment, but is turning into a bonus that created an XP gap and is widening it.
Honestly? For all that I seem to have benefited from it, I wouldn't mind cutting bonus exp to a much mroe secondary position. Currently it accounts for...1/4-1/2 of our total? I'd preffer the group stay relatively on the level with each other more than anything else.
Just a few comments of my own! I typed up something big and long, but it's gone. (Secretly, I blame May, for distracting me.)
1) I like this. Um. I talked about it in the house page, but yeah.
:D
2) I like the idea of reducing critical failures. Crit fails are gay, even when enemies do them. I can't reconcile myself with the way you seem to have 1/30 chance of hitting your ally by accident, even if you're a level 5 fighter (which is puportedly pretty awesome). I'd rather reduce their frequency or reduce their effect. 1/400 sounds good.
Critical hits I'd actually like to leave as-is. Combat is supposed to be pretty lethal, remember, and damage-wise, we can all take a few sword blows before going down. A little silly visually. So I think critical hits increase the tension in combat- especially for us, as we get attacked far more often than enemies do.
Yes, this skews the odds against us, but I like combat being dangerous, because it makes victory all the more sweet.
3/4) Bonus XP? I won't say much here, because Elaine did most of it, but yeah. Everyone tends to think they're doing a decent job, but I'll admit I've been thinking, "Hmm, if I do THIS, will I get bonus XP for it?"
It's partially because of the keep-up-with-the-jonses thing, and partially due to the awards being large enough that we're always going to want to claw them ahead. I figure you've been raising them higher because it takes more XP to level, but I'm not entirely against levelling taking longer in and of itself, either.
Just some thoughts.
5) Individual sessions are actually pretty cool. Just gotta try and give people as much screen time as they want, y'know? I'm personally quite pro-active about this, honestly, so I'm the most likely one to actually ask for extra sessions along these lines. Dunno about just giving them to people, but hey.
1) - Mmm. I read it and I'll rule on it today. I don't really have any objection per se.
2) - Honestly? This group has had crazy luck with criticals. I don't know what to make of it; I've never seen a group like this for dicing. On one hand I'm hesitant to mess with these - I do like it this way and it's simplistic. On the other? Mmmm. Darius and Gavin, do you have any opinion on this?
3-4) - Mmm. The jump in experience is purely to offset leveling up, so that said bonuses don't become pointless. But mm, reading this over, you do raise valid points. I'll freely admit I've probably been erratic giving out awards - they tend to be fiat based, and thus varies with my mood and how things strike me.
Off the cuff thoughts and suggestions:
- Simply nuke bonus EXP. Brute force method and I don't really like it.
- Nuke bonus EXP, give out one group award for overall RPing/playing, per session. Feels a little too communist for my tastes, but it does encourage good groupsmanship.
- One overall award for each player. This takes in the totality of what everyone did, not just successes. (I do tend to reward successes well, but Elaine had a point about that, too.)
5) It is a Weekly game, but some side things are best done alone. Taking the entire group along for these sort of things tends to be horridly impractical time and effort wise. If you want sessions and have ideas of things to do or want little things from the GM, by all means say so. I don't mind at all.
---
As another note, by all means bring these issues up. If you feel you have something to say about Serith or bonus EXP or whatever, I'd rather hear it than not. I appreciate the feedback, I really do.
I think the thing with bonus XP is to remember that it's bonus XP. I don't feel that it should encompass the lions share of our take, and giving huge rewards for technically small actions doesn't sit right with me. At the end of a quest, sure, but how much do you really learn, overall, just from OHKO'ing one guy?
(<Thrall> 100xp!)
Anyway, I think the things we need to remember are what we're giving out bonus XP for, and the quantity we're doling out.
What is sort of debatable. I like XP to reflect genuine experience and learning. Theoretically, you learn by doing cool things as much as anything, but this also encompasses realising something new about the world, learning something about a friend, etc. These awards aren't big, but they're all part of the adventurers repetoire. i.e., this XP should reflect what you as a player learn as well as what your character should learn.
Of course, 'doing cool shit' is plenty awesome enough, too.
The other thing is quantity. I think bonus XP should be more like sprinkles on top of the cake, rather than the cake itself, so while we should get an amount that does give us incentive, it shouldn't be so great that we get silly about it. I figure, maybe just looking at the quest/monster XP you've given out, and figuring bonus XP should equate to about 10-20% of that?
Hmm.. For crits.. Eh.. I'm sorta leery of messing with them..
I understand what Rat was saying with them being sorta gay, but... At the same time I sorta like having them around..
I dunno, maybe some kind of extra rule? Something where if you crit fail, you have a chance to cover your ass based on your level/skill at the task?
Like, for each level of proficiency with a weapon, you get one chance to recover from a critical failure? So, with basic proficency, you get one 'save', at specilization you two, mastery threee, ect.
Dunno, really just kinda tossing stuff around.. I will say this, though, I've done a number of things in real life that could count as 'critical failures,' especially in the Marines and firing my rifle, and the better I got with my rifle, the more I *was* able to keep from looking like a retard =p
Well, let's see, lots off things said.
2)Crit's first. On the realism thing that Iddy brought in:
10:09] <Dracos> Darius, aren't you supposed to be a master at this point?
[10:09] <Iddy> Yeah.
[10:10] <Iddy> I've got Scimitar Mastery.
[10:10] <Dracos> Shouldn't that be at least equivilent to where you are now in expertise with rifles in real life? Do you fuck up once a day with those?
[10:10] <Iddy> Ahhahahahhaahhahahah.
[10:10] <Dracos> =p
[10:11] * Dracos is the funnyman.
[10:11] <Iddy> My fuck up with rifles are few and *very* far between.
[10:11] <Iddy> And I'm not a master with it, yet.
[10:11] <Saul> Well, the counter-argument to that is 'yeah but it's easier to fuck up mid-combat'.
[10:11] <Iddy> I'm a step below it.
[10:11] <Iddy> No, its not.
[10:11] <Saul> I guess you'd know!
[10:12] <Iddy> Trust me, people fuck up more in training than they do in combat.
[10:12] <Iddy> I've seen people fuck up using a *grenade* in training, and then do it perfectly in combat every time.
[10:12] <Dracos> The whole 'you can get killed if you screw up' is great incentive,, I'm sure.
The overwhelming majority of us fighting are supposed to have years and years of training with their given weapons. I think this sort of thing points if we're trying for realism, the fuckups are way too common.
I think the model is way too simple. Yes, it's nice to have it that way. But it's going to lead to more and more insanity as you have both myself and Iddy heading towards being a grandmaster with our given weapons.
I'm keen with one of two things: Thing the first: Doing it as 3rd ed does it. Yes, this was a smart change for the better. A crit fail is a definite miss, but is it a crit fail? Roll again to see and only a double crit fail is it. This would certainly drop us from (between us AND the enemies) having 2-5 crit fails every session and practically guarenteed for our fighters to have at least one every prolonged fight simply by the odds. Same with crit hits. A crit is definitely a hit, but need it always be a hit that was savagely deadly? I don't think so, and yes, I am biased by the fact many enemies need that 18-20 to hit me anyway, so one third of their actual hits are going to be brutal criticals. The 3rd ed 'roll, if you 20, roll and if you hit again its a crit' actually makes defenses relevant to crits. A mage in soft robes is far easier to do critical damage to than a knight in fullplate.
Thing the second: Giving a 1 roll recovery per 1 or 2 ranks of battle skill. Simple, but takes more and more rolls when it happens and either encourages you to make high and grand mastery meaningless by giving it to random enemies or gives our fighter team a huge advantage. I'd rather not use this, but at least it'd be sensible and saying "You guys have like 10 years of fighting with this blade. Crit failures are something you should be accostumed to recovering from". Saul suggests a dex check here or such. I dunno about that.
Either way, I'd like us to actually acknowledge that this isn't strange behavior. I've seen it frequently enough and simple game mechanics knowledge says thhis is how it's likely to happen. We do about 20+ rolls a session. Crit fails are going to happen each session and often more than once with that. A single round of combat these days can involve easily 10-11 attack rolls. Meaning pretty much there's about a 50 percent chance of having a crit fail every other round of combat. If we want to keep the dicing this way, that's what's going to happen. More, it'll get worse as it goes on. When several of us start hitting the 4-5 attacks a round, we'll be seeing 12-16 rolls just from us each battle round or so since we have 3 people dual wielding. If we got 5-10 enemies out there with 2 attacks each (fairly sensible around level 8-10), we're going to be seeing more attacks per round than their are faces on the dice. A crit fail per round would not be odd to see in that case. Do we want to get to that point where one of us (enemy or hero) is crit failing every round or two of combat?
I think I'll do each as separate posts >_> <_<
Dracos
1)
Said what I said over in house rules. I do think it should be kept in mind that this is something far more for the other players than it is for rat.
5) Individual sessions.
I well understand the 'handling small things in solo bits' type deal. But...
Fairness does come into play here. we signed on for a weekly deal. Not all of us have time even if we want to for this kind of stuff. It's not a question of being proactive or not, but I have 3 games I'm in each week for about a total of 11 hours. That's about the max I can guarentee myself weekly without damaging other obligations. It's simply not possible to keep up sidequest wise with folks yammering for extra sessions every session. Even more so, when I can, doesn't mean Dune is free. I've sat there sometimes all day ready and having poked that I am up for gaming an open solo session and watching the moonkingdom game getting run (which is run perpetually in effect and hard to compete with for time). It's a two way street here that's pretty clogged in my perception and I wouldn't mind much at all if it wasn't for two things...
I don't have hard numbers because I know it's often melded right into the 'adventure' xp, but Merc brought up (and I think he's right) that this is part of what's creating the xp gap. Merc and I have played in the least extra sessions and are coincidentally the furthest behind. Is it cause and effect? I can't tell because the stuff is melded together so I don't know if it's other things or folks steadily gaining that extra few hundred each week from side sessions. That's though a minor thing. It's annoying and should be balanced out, but it's minor.
The more major thing is it does feel like those that clamor for the extra sessions and get them are getting a steady advantage. This is a cooperative venture for all of us, and in effect it's like there's private sessions going on and we come back each week with the GMs eyes far more on the people he just had a session with yesterday. It might be me observing stuff that isn't there, but it sure feels like there's a disconnect in that area. It's not intentional or unexpected. Dune has a reason to be more comfortable with people he's gaming 10-15 hours a week with over people he's gaming 5. Moreso, it often leads to solo things that are dragging on during the weekly. I know I've sat there a considerable number of hours waiting for these solo carry ons to be resolved and generally finding sticking my nose into said solo carry ons to be negatively responded to in the 'huh, there's someone else here? I'm not expecting that!' kind of way.
I see these sorts of things as sort of an issue. Not a huge one, but something that the effect is there and it's kind of disheartening. I wouldn't have brought it up if Merc hadn't poked me noticing the precise same kind of stuff and suggesting we ambush Dune to try and 'keep pace'.
Basically, I'd be keen seeing these moved back to 'resolving things that need a little more resolution' and less 'here's a big side adventure complete with hundreds of xp and added storyline that'll be dragged into the next three weeks of sessions!'
Anyhow, more on that in bonuses.
Dracos
3)
Tagging this quick. Success based is a bad way to do bonuses. It doesn't really encouage good behavior (Which, if anything, is one of the main reasons for bonuses in the first place). At least how I play generally, I eventually start following the behavior that is encouraged. Called shots for instance? I no longer do those at all because they're strongly discouraged both on the system side and on the zero reward for playing it side, even if they're significantly more fun to do.
Rewarding on success basically encourages not taking risks with things you know you can't do and twinking in few areas to ensure theres things you have a good success chance on. Instead of encouraging overall just trying things and being creative, ideas are instead asked "Do I have a very good chance to succeed? Because if not, this'll not only hurt me in game, but will also garner no reward for trying something exciting". Rewards based on creativity or general addition to play result in more of that.
If two players both say "hey, I should search for secret doors here", one shouldn't get more xp than the other in a bonus because one rolled high and one rolled low. They should both get the bonus (if there's one at all) because they both said "hey, let's search for secret doors here" and used their skills to do so.
That is of course under the assumption it's given at all. Basically, this is a 'think about what you want to encourage, because I promise you, we notice and pay attention'.
Dracos
4) The biggie issue, eh?
erratic is a good way to put it, but in my case, they've actively become discouraging rather than encouraging. Some of it is unconscious things, your 'buttons' to put it simply.
Darius for example, hits your buttons frequently. Serith, already a reward, has become a perpetual xp machine for him on top of being a big bonus to seizing center stage in a crowded group of players. On top of that, personality wise he just meshes with you better than the rest of us, so he tends to get xp awards significantly more easily, no matter what he does. That's at least the trend I've been witnessing the last 4 adventures or so.
Seryf is a bit similar. You like the girl-girl interplay, and thus everything she does with Elaine is worthy of reward and usually significant reward.
These likes wouldn't be a problem at all if they weren't discouragingly representing themselves in significant increases almost oddly separate from events. Merc brought up his discussion with Seryf and the realization hit that his character got more xp for having girl talk than for training to kill things with a sword.
Moreso, certain behaviors are shown as favored as well. I'm playing a conservative fighter. I don't think I've seen a 'yeah, good job being conservative' once where I've seen several 'way to run ahead of the group' thumbs up xp to playing a berserker. Could I play that/ yeah, but then I'd be altering Gavin just to hunt the xp rewards for certain kinds of behavior.
Philosophically? I don't have a problem with them being there and being small and reasonably spread among us. So far though? I can spend two hours playing out with characters from my backstory including sparring and get nothing while Serith can look cute and get Darius 300 xp. It's discouraging to play under such as I really don't believe I'm doing a horrible job of playing Gavin, but bonus wise, it feels like it. Last adventure Gavin had a scene with knight leadership, had to tell the rest of the party the calvery wasn't coming, and as usually perpetually played his overprotective self, particularly with elaine who he's gotten a habit of that with, listened and followed the advice of his commander and then proceeded to play shock at the accidental results. But when you look at the bonuses, nothing without doubly poking. That's really discouraging when I don't see myself as having played those scenes poorly and don't think it should result in me falling hundreds back compared to 'yeah, I'm an elf I search, ooh 300 xp!'. That sort of stuff is discouraging.
I'm also a numbers guy. At the moment? I'm nearly 10000 xp behind Darius on the route to level 6. That's several adventures worth and kind of disheartening in context of the fact it feels like I can't really get any side thing to catch that up. I don't have a problem being slightly behind from my xp table, but I don't feel I'm doing less work in the party or less RPing than Darius and definitely not that much. I worry, as a player, of my own impending obseleteness if he continues getting farther ahead of me. One level makes it tough. Two or three levels? It'd be brutal since in effect we're both fighters, with the difference being that way on in the end I get a couple of cure lights and supposedly some support from being aligned with a big organization while he gets a big xp generating tiger that helps him out perpetually.
I'd rather have team xp at this point than bonuses at all. They haven't been encouraging in my eyes since very early and for some cases, they almost seem like an open smack in the face. Example of note being Merc's performance, which while slow, was a fair bit of writing for him and in turn resulted in him getting the low man on the totem pole for that scene. Or, alternatively, hotaru's mention of the '1000 xp' for darius after a long scene. This has gotten more pronounced as adventures spread full months now, and it's particularly disheartening to look at a month of gaming and get tiny bonus reward while watching everyone else in the party tons. I think how they stand now they just generate hostility and there's several folks who've commented that they have no idea why they're getting such huge rewards.
Dracos
Quote from: "Dracos"5) Individual sessions.
I well understand the 'handling small things in solo bits' type deal. But...
Fairness does come into play here. we signed on for a weekly deal. Not all of us have time even if we want to for this kind of stuff. It's not a question of being proactive or not, but I have 3 games I'm in each week for about a total of 11 hours. That's about the max I can guarentee myself weekly without damaging other obligations. It's simply not possible to keep up sidequest wise with folks yammering for extra sessions every session. Even more so, when I can, doesn't mean Dune is free. I've sat there sometimes all day ready and having poked that I am up for gaming an open solo session and watching the moonkingdom game getting run (which is run perpetually in effect and hard to compete with for time). It's a two way street here that's pretty clogged in my perception and I wouldn't mind much at all if it wasn't for two things...
True, true. Part of it is gaming enthuasm. People want to play and I want to run sessions with these characters since we all seem to be having fun.
QuoteI don't have hard numbers because I know it's often melded right into the 'adventure' xp, but Merc brought up (and I think he's right) that this is part of what's creating the xp gap. Merc and I have played in the least extra sessions and are coincidentally the furthest behind. Is it cause and effect? I can't tell because the stuff is melded together so I don't know if it's other things or folks steadily gaining that extra few hundred each week from side sessions. That's though a minor thing. It's annoying and should be balanced out, but it's minor.
Mmm. This is partly true, yes. I still maintain that Darius and his swoop and sprint into the tomb action got him a grand or two extra. But anyway, that's probably a good point. More playing time and more chances for EXP and bonuses=gap. Seems logical enough.
You're probably right in some way, but I'll mull this over in conjunction with other related issues.
QuoteThe more major thing is it does feel like those that clamor for the extra sessions and get them are getting a steady advantage. This is a cooperative venture for all of us, and in effect it's like there's private sessions going on and we come back each week with the GMs eyes far more on the people he just had a session with yesterday. It might be me observing stuff that isn't there, but it sure feels like there's a disconnect in that area. It's not intentional or unexpected. Dune has a reason to be more comfortable with people he's gaming 10-15 hours a week with over people he's gaming 5. Moreso, it often leads to solo things that are dragging on during the weekly. I know I've sat there a considerable number of hours waiting for these solo carry ons to be resolved and generally finding sticking my nose into said solo carry ons to be negatively responded to in the 'huh, there's someone else here? I'm not expecting that!' kind of way.
Yeah. I've been starting to notice this, Drac. To be honest, you deserve an apology for it. I felt bad that day where you pretty much waited the entire day away for me to get my shit in order, not to mention things like this. While it is a cooperative venture, herein lies the crux. I'm getting attached to the characters and I know others are as well, and we -want- to do things when we can. Sometimes it spills over(Darius here comes to bleeding edge mind), sometimes it doesn't.
QuoteI see these sorts of things as sort of an issue. Not a huge one, but something that the effect is there and it's kind of disheartening. I wouldn't have brought it up if Merc hadn't poked me noticing the precise same kind of stuff and suggesting we ambush Dune to try and 'keep pace'.
No, no, no. By all means bring it up. I'd rather see you say something than not. I insist, as a matter of fact.
QuoteBasically, I'd be keen seeing these moved back to 'resolving things that need a little more resolution' and less 'here's a big side adventure complete with hundreds of xp and added storyline that'll be dragged into the next three weeks of sessions!'
Anyhow, more on that in bonuses.
Dracos
Mmm. At the very least notably cut back any EXP from these minor side trips. Keep them more isolated and non directly interfering with the main game, perhaps?
Quote from: "Dracos"1)
Said what I said over in house rules. I do think it should be kept in mind that this is something far more for the other players than it is for rat.
Okay. Not much of note to say here, we've been hashing this over in other places.
Quote from: "Dracos"3)
Tagging this quick. Success based is a bad way to do bonuses. It doesn't really encouage good behavior (Which, if anything, is one of the main reasons for bonuses in the first place). At least how I play generally, I eventually start following the behavior that is encouraged. Called shots for instance? I no longer do those at all because they're strongly discouraged both on the system side and on the zero reward for playing it side, even if they're significantly more fun to do.
Called shots are a particularly ick point. I don't want to discourage them as much as I want to discourage them from being used to easily disable or defeat opponents in a single shot or two. You are right about the D and D base system not encouraging them.
There's just a lot of room for advantages and frankly abuse if they're too easy, but I don't want them to be impossible, either. If you have a better suggestion, I'm all ears.
QuoteRewarding on success basically encourages not taking risks with things you know you can't do and twinking in few areas to ensure theres things you have a good success chance on. Instead of encouraging overall just trying things and being creative, ideas are instead asked "Do I have a very good chance to succeed? Because if not, this'll not only hurt me in game, but will also garner no reward for trying something exciting". Rewards based on creativity or general addition to play result in more of that.
Yeah. That's another point, one that I've started to notice recently as well. It's one of the big strikes against the whole bonus EXP messiness. A good deal my fault, too - the person that does the idea to find the hidden doors should get the award, not whom finds them(Unless said finding was intelligent and ingenious as well.). The roleplaying awards are a stab in that direction, I suppose.
QuoteIf two players both say "hey, I should search for secret doors here", one shouldn't get more xp than the other in a bonus because one rolled high and one rolled low. They should both get the bonus (if there's one at all) because they both said "hey, let's search for secret doors here" and used their skills to do so.
Yep.
QuoteThat is of course under the assumption it's given at all. Basically, this is a 'think about what you want to encourage, because I promise you, we notice and pay attention'.
Dracos
I'm noticing that. <_<
Quote from: "Anastasia"Quote from: "Dracos"5) Individual sessions.
I well understand the 'handling small things in solo bits' type deal. But...
Fairness does come into play here. we signed on for a weekly deal. Not all of us have time even if we want to for this kind of stuff. It's not a question of being proactive or not, but I have 3 games I'm in each week for about a total of 11 hours. That's about the max I can guarentee myself weekly without damaging other obligations. It's simply not possible to keep up sidequest wise with folks yammering for extra sessions every session. Even more so, when I can, doesn't mean Dune is free. I've sat there sometimes all day ready and having poked that I am up for gaming an open solo session and watching the moonkingdom game getting run (which is run perpetually in effect and hard to compete with for time). It's a two way street here that's pretty clogged in my perception and I wouldn't mind much at all if it wasn't for two things...
True, true. Part of it is gaming enthuasm. People want to play and I want to run sessions with these characters since we all seem to be having fun.
Yup and it goes for all of us, but some of us have greater time limitations than others. Ideally, we don't want the game to be an all encompassing thing to stay even. It gets frustrating otherwise.
Quote
QuoteI don't have hard numbers because I know it's often melded right into the 'adventure' xp, but Merc brought up (and I think he's right) that this is part of what's creating the xp gap. Merc and I have played in the least extra sessions and are coincidentally the furthest behind. Is it cause and effect? I can't tell because the stuff is melded together so I don't know if it's other things or folks steadily gaining that extra few hundred each week from side sessions. That's though a minor thing. It's annoying and should be balanced out, but it's minor.
Mmm. This is partly true, yes. I still maintain that Darius and his swoop and sprint into the tomb action got him a grand or two extra. But anyway, that's probably a good point. More playing time and more chances for EXP and bonuses=gap. Seems logical enough.
You're probably right in some way, but I'll mull this over in conjunction with other related issues.
This is what I mentally noted as 'rewarding berserker behavior'. I looked at that and had to mentally remind myself "Gavin is a knight. He does not rush off like that, even if it's behaviour getting rewarded in context".
Anyhow yeah. Mull mull, we're certainly burying you in it ^^;
Quote
QuoteThe more major thing is it does feel like those that clamor for the extra sessions and get them are getting a steady advantage. This is a cooperative venture for all of us, and in effect it's like there's private sessions going on and we come back each week with the GMs eyes far more on the people he just had a session with yesterday. It might be me observing stuff that isn't there, but it sure feels like there's a disconnect in that area. It's not intentional or unexpected. Dune has a reason to be more comfortable with people he's gaming 10-15 hours a week with over people he's gaming 5. Moreso, it often leads to solo things that are dragging on during the weekly. I know I've sat there a considerable number of hours waiting for these solo carry ons to be resolved and generally finding sticking my nose into said solo carry ons to be negatively responded to in the 'huh, there's someone else here? I'm not expecting that!' kind of way.
Yeah. I've been starting to notice this, Drac. To be honest, you deserve an apology for it. I felt bad that day where you pretty much waited the entire day away for me to get my shit in order, not to mention things like this. While it is a cooperative venture, herein lies the crux. I'm getting attached to the characters and I know others are as well, and we -want- to do things when we can. Sometimes it spills over(Darius here comes to bleeding edge mind), sometimes it doesn't.
Yeah, I don't have a problem with attachment, as long as it's with all of us. Basically, when the extra effort is placed on attachments already formed strong, it can feel really hard to participate effectively. When folks that don't need any extra at the moment are getting the extra thought/inspiration time, it tends to push the rest of us further from center stage rather than dragging us together into center stage.
I fully understand the whole thing. I know I'd generally be thrilled with more time playing Gavin. It's just if we have it how it's been going, it becomes isolating into groups that have 'x' hours consistant with you each week.
Quote
QuoteI see these sorts of things as sort of an issue. Not a huge one, but something that the effect is there and it's kind of disheartening. I wouldn't have brought it up if Merc hadn't poked me noticing the precise same kind of stuff and suggesting we ambush Dune to try and 'keep pace'.
No, no, no. By all means bring it up. I'd rather see you say something than not. I insist, as a matter of fact.
I understand, but I still try and restrain unless others are seeing these too. I know well my ability and tendancy to argue things into the ground as well as my tendancy to hyperfocus on numbers and thus if it's a minor thing, I wait a bit to see if it resolves itself. trust in the gm and all that =P I know things do lopside from time to time if a campaign is to be exciting at all. This has gone on a bit and others saw it, so it got discussed and then elaborated on.
Quote
QuoteBasically, I'd be keen seeing these moved back to 'resolving things that need a little more resolution' and less 'here's a big side adventure complete with hundreds of xp and added storyline that'll be dragged into the next three weeks of sessions!'
Anyhow, more on that in bonuses.
Dracos
Mmm. At the very least notably cut back any EXP from these minor side trips. Keep them more isolated and non directly interfering with the main game, perhaps?
[/quote]
Sounds good enough as a fix to try for starters =) That and keep an eye open for where others can be worked in. I'm not blind to the fact that sometimes they carry over. But if they carry over, it's no longer solo and should be open to drag the others into it. Yes, it disrupts the one on oneness of the sidegame, but more importantly, it keeps the 'this is a living world we're in' experience and keeps everyone engaged.
Dracos
QuoteQuote from: "Anastasia"Quote from: "Dracos"3)
Tagging this quick. Success based is a bad way to do bonuses. It doesn't really encouage good behavior (Which, if anything, is one of the main reasons for bonuses in the first place). At least how I play generally, I eventually start following the behavior that is encouraged. Called shots for instance? I no longer do those at all because they're strongly discouraged both on the system side and on the zero reward for playing it side, even if they're significantly more fun to do.
Called shots are a particularly ick point. I don't want to discourage them as much as I want to discourage them from being used to easily disable or defeat opponents in a single shot or two. You are right about the D and D base system not encouraging them.
There's just a lot of room for advantages frankly abuse if they're too easy, but I don't want them to be impossible, either. If you have a better suggestion, I'm all ears.
The way they handle it in D&D is lazy. My philosophy of it wraps on the simple premise; The GM is in charge of all resolutions. The GM gets to decide whether a blow to the arm is disabling or just stunning and dangerous. Called shots, in an idea case, should just be standard handling of descriptive prose "Is he going for a difficult strike? Yes, no?, +1 ac, or -1 ac, or etc."
A blow to the head can be fatal. It can be frightening and painful. It could be dehabilitating. I think the important thing is that the GM decides which of these it actually is. The GM also decides relevance. Is a penality relevant against a troll which generally has oversized arms and regeneration? Probably not, it might even be easier than normal strikes. Is a penalty relevant striking against against a swift moving thief's foot? Yeah, certainly since it's a lot harder to hit and if it hits, the gm should probably consider whether or not its a maiming blow.
I'd suggest just doing on the fly rulings. Use a limit of -2 bonus to +4 penalty. Decide based on whether it barely hit or was an easy strike how devestating it'll be in your head. Decide the bonus or penalty based on how easy the blow is, how well its RPed, etc. In other words, use it as something to encourage active fighting rather than roll based ones.
Quote
QuoteRewarding on success basically encourages not taking risks with things you know you can't do and twinking in few areas to ensure theres things you have a good success chance on. Instead of encouraging overall just trying things and being creative, ideas are instead asked "Do I have a very good chance to succeed? Because if not, this'll not only hurt me in game, but will also garner no reward for trying something exciting". Rewards based on creativity or general addition to play result in more of that.
Yeah. That's another point, one that I've started to notice recently as well. It's one of the big strikes against the whole bonus EXP messiness. A good deal my fault, too - the person that does the idea to find the hidden doors should get the award, not whom finds them(Unless said finding was intelligent and ingenious as well.). The roleplaying awards are a stab in that direction, I suppose.
QuoteIf two players both say "hey, I should search for secret doors here", one shouldn't get more xp than the other in a bonus because one rolled high and one rolled low. They should both get the bonus (if there's one at all) because they both said "hey, let's search for secret doors here" and used their skills to do so.
Yep.
QuoteThat is of course under the assumption it's given at all. Basically, this is a 'think about what you want to encourage, because I promise you, we notice and pay attention'.
Dracos
I'm noticing that. <_<
>_> <_<
Stealthy learn powers? =P
Dracos
Going to post two sets of logs here for discussion. First log set is the discussion over Beast Rider's EXP Progression Table from this morning in #mk. Second log set is a PM between me and Iddy commenting on that. Some slight edits taking unimportant conversation out might occur.
First log set:[11:12] <Dracos> Ana,re: xp tables as an opening thought: How it's been playing? I'm not seeing Darius at any significant disadvantage compared to the other two fighters.
[11:14] <Dracos> So maybe he should be on our xp tables, or us on his as the benefits/penalities its meant to encompass aren't really showing up. But mmm, I don't really think that's necessary.
[11:14] <Merc> I think Iddy should be on yours, not the other way around. You're all a lot more powerful thank Saul and I at same level. >_>;
[11:15] <Merc> than*
[11:15] <Dracos> Merc: Agreed.
[11:15] * Hotaru-chan nods.
[11:15] <Dracos> Which is why I proposed the knight kit be on that xp table to begin with.
[11:16] <Ana-away> I'd prefer not to muck with the EXP tables, but that's a suggestion. (For God's sake, talk to Iddy about it before you post much on it. Just as a cortesy if anything else.) Anyway, BRB
[11:16] <Dracos> I figured it was too powerful relative to a normal fighter with an organization alliance, a couple proficiencies, and such.
[11:17] <Dracos> anyhow, I think I'm with Dune there only in "If xp was neutral, it wouldn't matter"
[11:17] <Dracos> Him leveling an adventure early wouldn't be a big deal.
[11:17] <Dracos> It's when it starts getting 2-3 adventures early that it does.
[11:17] <Hotaru-chan> As the gap widens, though...
[11:17] * Merc nods.
[11:17] <Merc> Right now it's more controlling what could be a serious problem than an immidiate problem
[11:18] * Hotaru-chan put it in terms of fractions to really get it across: Darius requires 1/7 his current XP to level. Elaine, Gavin, and Seryf? We all need a little under 1/2.
[11:18] <Dracos> The gap, if anything, needs to be in may and my favor
[11:18] <Dracos> since by level 20 we'll need 600000 xp more than him.
[11:19] <Dracos> His level 20 is where our level 18 is.
[11:19] <Dracos> His level 11 where our level 10 is.
[11:20] <Dracos> Basically, even in neutral, he'll get a ways ahead without any help there.
[11:20] <Dracos> The extra pushes just make it significantly more apparent earlier.
[11:23] <Hotaru-chan> Which...is kinda the other thing. He comes off as the balance of Gavin and I (HP between us, AC between us, Damage between us) leaning slightly on the high end, plus Serith, just from a power stand point.
[11:23] * Ana-away nods to Drac. Mmm. EXP tuning.
[11:24] <Ana-away> For the moment, let's wait for Iddy and talk with him about it, I think. Do you think hiking up his EXP table would be the best solution? I'll do if everyone feels it's needed, I'm just loathe to fiddle with them mid game.
[11:24] <Dracos> ANa: I dunno.
[11:25] <Dracos> If xp rewards continue at all like they are, with playtime being a strong facet, it'll need to be in order to keep it sane.
[11:25] <Dracos> I'd rather have the balance though more be reflected in my and hotaru's backstuff coming into play.
[11:25] * Hotaru-chan doesn't really either. The feeling just is that he has boost after boost after boost to put him noticeably above Drac and I for less exp.
[11:25] <Merc> If you hike it up and it tosses him back a level, keep him on his current level, but just for him to progress, he'd have to follow new exp table. But yeah, right now Hotaru has a point that his abilities are something between Drac's and her's while still having Serith as a bonus.
[11:25] <Merc> And yet he's got a much easier exp table
[11:25] <Dracos> It's not a problem being a level below if that level is balanced with infrastructure and such.
[11:26] * Ana-away nods.
[11:26] <Ana-away> Mmm.
[11:26] <Dracos> There's supposed to be other things in play to help balance
[11:26] <Dracos> that aren't so much.
[11:26] <Ana-away> I'm almost certainly going to fuck with bonus EXP in some fashion now, to be fair.
[11:26] <Ana-away> Yes, that's what I was thinking, Drac. He wouldn't lose al evle, just need a ton to level up again.
[11:27] <Dracos> I'd wait on modifying Iddy's tables and more relevantly, just work in stuff for us. It's okay if he levels fast but gets no other bonuses. Rangers get allies, folks who'd call to them for help, etc. Same with knights who, in this country at least, should be providing a huge infrastructure bonus, allies, aid, etc that acount for some of the benefit balancing.
[11:28] <Hotaru-chan> I'm not a ranger, I don't think I even get allies. >_>;;
[11:28] <Merc> Fiera!
[11:28] <Merc> She'll follow you around with hearts in her eyes
[11:28] <Dracos> I thought you were, or a varient on ranger.
[11:28] * Ana-away nods to Drac.
[11:29] <Hotaru-chan> Stalker, I can't remember if my follower thing got yanked.
[11:29] * Ana-away chuckles at Merc.
[11:29] <Dracos> I don't mean that these are followers =p.
[11:29] <Merc> I thought follower thing was yanked for everyone.
[11:29] <Hotaru-chan> Oh.
[11:29] <Hotaru-chan> >_>;
[11:29] <Dracos> I spoke pretty strongly against followers and I'm pretty sure they got yanked for all.
[11:29] <Dracos> since they crowd the scene.
[11:29] <Dracos> and the scene is crowded enough.
[11:29] <Dracos> I think it would've been more neat, lets say, last session if the knights and elves had joined in.
[11:30] <Dracos> Not coming through the same door as us
[11:30] <Dracos> but just sort of a knowledge that 'look, here's your allies working for you'
[11:30] <Hotaru-chan> But something like a coordinated attack from all directions on the whole guild.
[11:30] <Dracos> exactly
[11:30] <Dracos> they could've been entirely off camera after the initial bit.
[11:30] <Dracos> But it did really feel weak being in the power center of the knights and having them have to hold back there.
Second post log:
[14:06] <Iddy> I'll PM Dune about it.
[14:07] <Ami-chan> Was around 11am
[14:07] <Ami-chan> that talk went by
[14:07] <Ami-chan> and Ana is probably going to put you off for now
[14:07] <Ami-chan> since he's distracted with SM gaming
[14:08] <Iddy> Eh, well, at least it'll get it into his brain and mine to pick it up later.
[14:08] <Ami-chan> heh
[14:09] <Iddy> >.> I don't even consider XP for that stuff, really <.<;
[14:11] <Iddy> I feel like I'm about to get beat down here =p
[14:11] <Ami-chan> Mostly, the commentary right now is that as a warrior, you're essentially between Drac and May in terms of damage, AC, speed, etc, or maybe a little better than average. However, you also have Serith as a bonus to you, but are also racking up XP for using a bonus, when your character's XP table is faster than Drac's and May's. Essentially, if you were levelling equally, at level 18 for them, you'd already be level 20.
[14:12] <Ami-chan> And yet you're not levelling equally, so we want to see more balanced bonus exp, and maybe seeing your exp table matching Drac's and May's.
[14:12] <Ami-chan> Though since you weren't included in that discussion, we didn't post it in the musings thread yet.
[14:12] <Ami-chan> As we wanted to see your thoughts on it first.
[14:13] <Iddy> Well, I know I've been racking up XP like I'm standing under a waterfall of it..
[14:13] <Ami-chan> Right now it's not a problem if you're like a level ahead, but if it continues, and you start being 2-3 classes ahead of everyone?
[14:13] <Iddy> I just never really paid any attention to it.
[14:14] <Ami-chan> Everyone's going to start being obsolete around you
[14:14] <Iddy> Well, yeah, I can see that, and I didn't even know how far ahead I was until last night, though. I knew I was way ahead of Rat, but I didn't know how far ahead of everyone else.
[14:15] <Iddy> And to be honest, I haven't really done much side-story stuff. And all the side story stuff I've done has always led to some kind of medium to big combat situation.
[14:16] <Iddy> Where as you and Seryf do side RP stuff all the time, so I never really paid attention to it.
[14:16] <Ami-chan> You're at 28,022, Then is Rat at 24,959, then Seryf at 24,610, then Gavin at 24,315, then me at 22,989
[14:16] <Ami-chan> I haven't done side RP stuff at all. >_>;
[14:16] <Ami-chan> besides meeting with Elaine's mother and uncle
[14:16] <Ami-chan> everything else has involved pretty much everyone else.
[14:18] <Iddy> Well, yeah, but you and Seryf score XP for RPing stuff, I don't really get the chance to do that all that often.. I think the biggest problem was that Dune really like the Beast Rider idea and once I got into it and started playing it solidly, he kinda went off the deep end.
[14:19] <Ami-chan> I was scoring XP for RPing stuff a lot more in the beginning. Now not so much, to be honest.
[14:19] <Ami-chan> I actually got the -least- XP for RPing during the bardic show
[14:20] <Ami-chan> Which didn't really make sense to me, really.
[14:20] <Iddy> Yeah, but I never really did at all. The only side stuff I've ever scored was that hunting thing waaaaayyy in the begining, and then the one I split with rat, and the one I split with Seryf.
[14:21] <Ami-chan> You actually consistently get the highest RP awards during the RP sessions. If you look at the two EXP threads for downtime, you'll see you got the highest RP exp.
[14:21] <Iddy> Now, I'll agree I been scoring XP crazy-like, you guys are making it sound like its *my* fault >.>;
[14:21] <Ami-chan> no, it's not your fault
[14:21] <Iddy> Yeah, I know I do.
[14:21] <Ami-chan> Dune is overdoing the bonus awards
[14:21] <Ami-chan> you've actually done -good- to get RP bonuses
[14:21] <Ami-chan> you do deserve them
[14:21] <Ami-chan> it's just that they're crazy high
[14:21] <Ami-chan> and the exp table thing is starting to become apparent now
[14:22] <Ami-chan> even though it didn't use to be, so nobody thought about it earlier.
[14:22] <Iddy> But that's *Dune's* deal. I've never once said anything about wanting XP.
[14:22] * Ami-chan nods.
[14:22] <Ami-chan> I know, he's handling the bonus exp thing
[14:22] <Ami-chan> What he wants -your- input on, is the exp table thing
[14:22] <Ami-chan> where essentially, you'd be levelling less fast.
[14:22] <Iddy> Yeah, but now you guys are talking about slamming me with a penalty to make up for it. I wouldn't mind if he went back and modified (subtracted) xp to even out.
[14:22] <Ami-chan> Since you'd be using something like Drac's or May's table
[14:22] <Ami-chan> instead of base fighter's
[14:23] <Ami-chan> no, the penalty of the exp table isn't to lower your exp. It's to balance your levelling so you level on the same table as Drac and May
[14:23] <Ami-chan> it's a class balance, not a penalty on you for Dune's exp giving
[14:24] <Ami-chan> but if you don't -think- it's a class balance, that's what Dune wants you to comment on
[14:24] <Ami-chan> because he understands that switching to a harder exp table might be seen as a penalty and not a class balance thing.
[14:25] <Iddy> Like I said, if its just to balance out, it'd be easier if he just went back and looked over everything he's given me and be like 'Okay, yeah, I went overboard.. Adjust -200xp' or whatever.. I don't really have a problem with the xp table getting changed around, though..
[14:25] <Iddy> It just feels like my class is getting changed around to suit the pace of the game, when its the pace of the game that's fucked up, not my class.
[14:28] <Ami-chan> Well, that's sort of why I was pointing out that level 18/20 comparison thing. If we were all getting exp equally, when Drac and May are hitting level 18, you'd be hitting level 20. It's kind of weird that your class would level faster when it doesn't exactly have negative features to make up for its bonuses. Drac's class has a lot of features as a knight (like the armor/weapon proficiencies), but is balanced by the slow progression table.
[14:28] <Ami-chan> May's class also has features that are balanced by slow progression table
[14:28] <Ami-chan> Your class features which are bonuses to bare fighter, much like May's and Drac's, still uses bare boned fighter's progression table
[14:28] <Ami-chan> which is faster.
[14:29] <Ami-chan> The problem would have cropped up even if Dune wasn't overdoing the XP thing.
[14:29] <Iddy> I talked to Dune about that before this game ever started. I told him I'd be leveling faster because of Serith, because she increases my combat ability, and suggested the XP be split evenly between the two of us.
[14:29] <Ami-chan> It's just that it became more obvious now rather than later because of it.
[14:30] <Ami-chan> Hrm...I think that's a bit too harsh instead.
[14:30] <Iddy> Actually, no. Think about it.
[14:30] <Iddy> All those 300xp bonuses that I've gotten from Serith would instead go straight to her, with only a small portion going to me.
[14:31] <Ami-chan> I suppose. Plus she does give you more attacks, so it is sort of like Saul's dual class thing.
[14:31] <Iddy> Like, 275xp to Serith, 25 to me.
[14:31] <Ami-chan> I'm still not sure if that's a little too harsh compared to the slower progression table of a paladin's.
[14:32] <Iddy> It wouldn't fix it if you changed the table, just slow it down.
[14:32] <Ami-chan> Hrm...
[14:32] <Iddy> The problem is I'm scoring a shit-ton more XP than you guys are because of bonuses.
[14:32] <Iddy> You making my leveling take more xp than before wouldn't change that. Just make it take a little longer.
[14:32] * Ami-chan nods
[14:33] <Iddy> It'd still add up, and I'd still get ahead of you guys. Just not as quickly.
[14:33] <Ami-chan> So essentially, you're treating it as if you were multi-classing (like Saul), just in two fighter classes, one for you and one for Serith?
[14:34] <Iddy> Not quite.
[14:34] <Iddy> Serith is a seperate character. She should be getting XP seperately from me.
[14:34] <Ami-chan> So just RP XP gets split then?
[14:34] <Iddy> I should just be getting a few small bonuses for her extra work. Like a commander.
[14:35] <Iddy> The problem is I'm getting XP bonuses from *two* characters instead of just one.
[14:35] * Ami-chan nods.
[14:36] <Iddy> My class progression isn't the problem. Its how XP is being awarded to *both* Serith and me.
[14:36] <Iddy> It's like..
[14:36] <Iddy> I'm her supervisor, you know?
[14:36] <Iddy> I give her orders, she does the work, and I get the recognition for it.
[14:37] * Ami-chan nods
[14:37] <Iddy> She should be getting the bulk of XP from that work, with only a little from me for being smart enough to give her orders.
[14:37] <Ami-chan> I don't know exactly how easy it would be for Ana to split that XP though. I guess it's a suggestion on how to balance the class's levelling.
[14:38] <Iddy> Well, just have an even scale.
[14:38] <Iddy> Like, I get 25% of whatever bonus XP she gets awarded, and she gets 25% of my bonus.
[14:38] <Iddy> So, if Serith is awarded 100 XP for whatever action I told her to make, I get 25.
[14:39] <Iddy> And if I get 100 XP bonus for an action or RP, she gets 25 from it.
[14:39] <Ami-chan> Hrm...
[14:39] <Iddy> Well, as long as we are both involved in it.
***
Sooo...discuss balance issues? Note that this is beast rider's progression specifically, not a bonus exp thing (though it does factor in). This is primarily for Iddy and Ana to start figuring on some things here.
I get what you all are saying about the XP table, but that's not what the problem is. The problem is the way XP is being awarded.
I'm getting awarded XP bonuses for *two* characters, but I have both characters leveling off of *one* XP pool. That's the problem.
It's also what Drac/Rat were saying earlier. The use of skills, like searching for secret doors. If multiple characters think to do it, they should all get a bonus of some kind, regardless if they find it or not. The bonus may not be as big as if they find it, but they should still get something.
In the past, Dune's awarded Serith (Darius) like, 100 XP or whatever, for tracking or searching or something, while no one else gets XP for similar things... Granted part of this *is* because few of the other PC's actually take the time to even try anything of the sort, but the point is still there. Instead of being awarded 100 XP for it, I'm actually getting awarded 200 XP for it, because it applies to two diffrent characters.
The XP table for Beast Rider isn't the problem. It's the way XP is being shifted around and awarded. Extending my XP table isn't going to solve the problem, just delay it. Instead of me being 20 when you guys hit 18, I'll 30 when you hit 28.
I'm going to suggest a new bonus EXP system, feedback appreciated. After this I'll get to post by post comments.
Bonus EXP is dependant on how the group does - it has a base of 15% of the adventure EXP. So for an adventure EXP total of 100, you'd have 15 points as a base. From there the GM modifies depending on how the player played in this session(And any relevant side sessions, at the GM's discretion.). This covers roleplaying, effort, ideas and general contributions, both successful or not.
The range of bonus EXP for each character is from 0 to 2 times the base amount of bonus EXP. This feels like a far easier and balanced way to reward players without it turning messy.
As a note, I'm likely to give out a zero only if a PC is NPCed the entire session. I can't really reward you for good playing if you're not here! Ideally I'd like to keep the range of EXP given from .5 to 1.5 times the bonus EXP unless a player is exceptionally bad/not here or exceptionally good.
Thoughts?
It's acceptable but...
I'd really like to push non-xp rewards. As stated, I'm a big fan of it rather beiing 'you're doing a good job, keep it up' or vice versa commentary. We're here to RP and that should be the reward, not the xp. XP is a scale on our battle capabilities and such more than anything else and well, it's all well and good to go "Bad player, no biscuit" if they miss a session, it's sort of out of touch with your player base and just lessens the teams ability to do neat quests that might be possible with an extra hit die from a level gain and such. At the same time, we don't want players getting far ahead of the crowd since it makes it harder to balance, they have more they can do, and then they keep getting the 1.5-2 bonus. If iddy, for example, picks that up a few adventures in a row, you'd get the same issue with him scaling quickly ahead of the pack.
if someone is being really good in game, they should end up getting in game rewards. xp shouldn't be needed on top. This can be reputation. it can be friends that can later be called in. it can be magic items. It can be just the fun of playing well.
If someone is honestly being good, it's fine to just tell them that and the rest of us will likely chime in in agreement.
Problems with this model I suggest: Means more xp needs to be in plot or we progress slower. No 'overtly clear' xp bonuses.
Benefits: Your players won't be arguing at each others throats, getting frustrated at being behind. It won't seem like it's so whim based. These are mature players so it'll keep the focus on the gaming and not on the 'scoring'. And maybe instead folks will update the scorecard or something with funny neat things that've been done instead of it having to be fulfilled by xp bonuses.
Dracos
Yes, I for one would *fully* like to see rewards other than XP. Instead of getting a 100 XP from killing that Lich or whatever, it'd be most awesome if you walked into a town and people went, "hey! That's the guy who killed that lich! Awesome! Let me buy you and ale!" or something along those lines.
---
Okay, can we take a break in this topic. I'm going ask a simple question and I want simple answers. Feel free to elaborate if you want.
Do you want bonus EXP? If so, in what form. If not, do you favor Drac's suggestion or just not worrying about it? This is turning into a larger headache than it's worth, honestly, and turning something we're having fun with into something that distinctly is unfun.
I'll withhold my opinion for now, as I'm willing to go in whatever direction you guys want with this.
To Iddy: You certainly like your god's piss ale, don't you? ^_^
To Ana: Bonus EXP is fine so long as it's smaller than the plot/battle exp. Getting other rewards, like in-game effects, items, sheet bonuses, reputation, etc, however, are also neat. I'd be happy with either, or a combination of both.
You did that with adventure 4, with Saul getting a lot of bonus exp, but no power-up, Seryf getting less overall exp but good powerups, and the rest of us getting some bonus exp with a small powerup too, and then all of us being treated by the elven villagers to talk about trials and stuff.
To build off of the 'non-xp' bent right at the moment, I'd kind of like to pull something up:
Yes, NPCs are a hassle...NPCs however, form most of what makes Drac and I notable withour difficult XP tables. It's our connections to political and paramilitary powers that even us out. And we kind of had those neatly tugged out from under us. =/
It was brought up this morning that we could've been using them indirectly: Have elves and knights crashing other thief parties, narrowing down the places Jeras could run to, and perhaps even cornering him in our own way.
Likewise, in sequence, Saul and Elaine could've been applying street pressure or spreading some coins around, picking up where Jeras might go next...
It just seemed like we got narrowed down simply because it turned messy, rather than the GM pausing a moment and turning the mess on its head.
I've got no real problem with bonus XP, its good to promote character use all around. Bonuses for being inventive enough to use skills/abilities where handy or otherwise would have been unthought of, inventiveness, ect..
However, bonuses shouldn't be limited to -just- XP, either. Like, for example, my fire resist, and Sun/Moon, ect. Extra spells for Saul, whatever.
On the critical system modification, my suggestion is:
Failure - A roll of 1 is a definite miss. If you roll a 1, you then roll another d20, and if you get another 1, it's a critical failure and only then demands the bad effects of such a roll. Probability goes from 1/20 to 1/400.
Success - A roll of 20 is a definite hit. You then roll again and attempt to make your thac0 against enemy's AC. If you hit them with second roll, you get the x2 damage multiplier. Probability varies based on character's thac0 and enemy's AC.
This isn't quite 3E's system where my understanding is that if you roll a 20, you have to roll another 20 to get the crit pass (or a 19-20 or a 18-20 based on the weapon you hold).
Instead, if you're at a high level, you have more chance of getting a crit pass than if you were at a low level, because you're more capable with your weapons. If your enemy has little armor with a dex of 8, you're more likely to do extra damage than if your enemy was wearing plate mail and had a dex of 20 while carrying a shield. If you're a warrior, you're also going to be more capable of hitting someone with your weapon than the wizard with a staff.
Chances are much better than 1/400, but not quite as good as 1/20, though they do get closer to that as we level.
Preliminary Revised Critical System
There are two types of criticals. Critical failure and Critical success.
A critical success chance is created by rolling the highest on the 'try' attempt. This is a 20 for purposes of to hit or a 1 for skill usage. A critical success chance is always a success but, to succeed critically, another roll must be made. If this roll is also a success, then it is a critical success.
Example case: Iddy rolls a 20 on his to hit and then a 1 after it. This is a hit, but not a critical hit. Iddy rolls a 20 with his other blade and then a 16. Because he's fighting an unarmored wizard, it's a hit and its a critical hit. Next Seryf goes and rolls a 20 (good rolls!) followed by a 10. Since her 10 isn't good enough to hit again, she just succeeds in hitting instead of doing double damage.
A critical failure chance is created by the opposite. It involves rolling the worst possible roll on a try attempt. This is a 1 for purposes of to hit or a 20 for skill attempts. As critical failures are significantly more disruptive than critical successes, they should happen less often, and thus a second maximum failure (another 1 or 20, respectively) should be rolled to see if its a critical failure.
Current status: Iddy, merc, and myself have rung in 'Yea' on this.
Alternatives:
That with addition:
19-20 threat range for speciaiization
18-20 threat range for high mastery.
That with addition:
19-20 slashing weapons.
+2 to confirm for piercing weapons.
I favor alternative 1, but am good for either.
Dracos