Thoughts for the night

Looking for my “like” button. Also, +50 bonus points for the use of the word “skullduggery”.

So, the original post was mainly about keeping vigilant about not increasing TNs for every-day skill checks, just to make them challenging. But I can see how that could segue into a discussion like this. Although I think you already know my opinion, I’ll state it for the record, anyway. I’m perfectly fine “missing” certain story elements. But I feel as though I’m in the minority there. I like the idea of having certain story elements that only trigger under certain circumstances. (And those could be based on previous decisions, party make-up or even dice rolls earlier in the adventure.) It more closely mirrors reality. It gives a potentially more immersive (and more sincere) story. In a shared-world campaign like this is, players want to feel as though every table that sits down to play an adventure has the same experience. And to a certain degree, that’s a desirable thing. But I think that the pendulum can swing too far. Every table *is* different. Every table *will* have a slightly different experience. And some tables will have a very different experience. That’s good. I’m all for it.

Now, the problem comes in when players enter into this social contract with the expectation that there are certain “right” choices that need to be made. …As if the adventure is a puzzle that needs all the right pieces put in a specific order in order to yield the expected outcome. And that expected outcome is a full-share of experience and/or treasure. That is, because this is a shared-world campaign, every time you leave a table, you walk away with a little piece of paper that says that you earned X out of Y experience and X out of Y treasure. It’s only human nature to wonder, “What did I do wrong?” “Why didn’t I get the maximum?” Here’s the subtle part… The two questions are not the same. I always wonder what I could have done to get the maximum (assuming that I did not.) And often, when I hear the answer I think to myself, “Oh. Well my character wasn’t going to do that. I just was never going to earn it all.” Or, “Oops. I didn’t think of that.” That’s fine, no harm done. But the asking, “What did I do wrong” makes the assumption that there are certain right and wrong choices. It also makes the assumption that you did not “achieve full success.” Both of these assumptions are wrong. RPGs are not board games. They are not supposed to be a competition. There are no winners and losers. There are only stories that are told in a special, shared-storyteller way. When you look at the game in that way, you should not feel slighted if you did not walk away from the table with 100% of the possible experience or treasure. But some people do, anyway.

And there’s part of the problem. As campaign staff, you want to please as many players as you can. But you won’t please them… us all. Everyone is different. Everyone enjoys different aspects of the game and for different reasons. So my suggestion is this… Whatever decision you come to, for whatever reasons you come to it, announce it. Explain why. And stick with it. No matter what decision you make, you will alienate some players and you will attract others. But if you change you minds and change the rules or the style of the campaign too much, you become like the politician who changes his stance on an issue and alienates constituents on both sides of the issue.

Me, I like Arcanis for the story. Keep an engaging, immersive story that I actually feel a part of, and I”ll keep playing. Turn it into Ebberon, where every player earned gold and bought whatever they could afford all the time, and I’ll treat it like I did that campaign and I’ll cheese it out and make it my &!^@#. (But I know that will never happen because the campaign staff cares too much about this setting to let that happen.)

To summarize: Rewards should be dictated by the story. Every table should be different. I won’t complain if I don’t “get max” rewards. Oh… and sorry for getting so long-winded.

Scott

My vote is for story first even if that means not getting full XP or finding everything there is within a particular story with a particular character. I strongly believe that TNs must remain as printed to help stave off the arms race. It means that characters who develop things at 2 ranks per level will actually get real mileage out of them, even if not as much as someone devoted to that path.

I believe that the rewards for a mod are set, regardless of the tier played. Assuming that’s true, it should be clearly stated with the campaign guide. Even if it’s only mostly true, I think a statement to that effect is still helpful. Knowing you don’t have to rush to the top or risk out on the best rewards would also help lessen the arms race. 3.5 was built strongly around the gear. Arcanis is not, but it may take a while for folks to truly appreciate that.

I also believe that with every mod, the core story MUST be within reach for all characters. They are the heroes of that story when it’s run. Success is something that they should be able to identify and appreciate. Mods that do not follow that principle should be clearly marked as to what kinds of heroes the story is appropriate. The soft point released at Arcanicon should probably get a note. Only those with particularly strong convictions or loyalty will really be able to see the mod in a progression for success. That doesn’t mean that they will succeed, but the goal they will wish for is within reach.

The bulk of the XP for a mod should reflect the above. As my wife pointed out setting expectations can be extremely helpful. “Max XP” for one of the hard points is 400, but there’s up to 110 extra XP available as a bonus. Expressed that way, it will be easier I think for both GMs and players to adhere to the spirit and letter of the XP earned. Bonus implies things done above and beyond. It removes the need for questions such as “What did I do wrong?” One other note on XP. If you want RP or skill heavy mods to be viewed as valuable, then the end XP rewards should be in line with mods where combat is more significant. I understand the risk/reward principle. Arcanis is built on the quality of its story and pulling people into the characters and the world.

I’m happy to see you go down the route of making richer stories whether those who have specific opportunities to experience them do so because of their race, nationality, background, Path or secret society. As long as people feel like you’re spreading those opportunities around, that should go more smoothly as well. I’m not suggesting you need to keep everything equal but if there are a half dozen mods that give extra RP, story and rewards to say the Emerald Society while any other group has at most one or two, you’ll either get a lot of converts, grumbling or both. Perhaps that’s overstating things and may be less relevant if pitched as I mention above.

Like Scott, I’ve rambled. Hopefully it hasn’t been too difficult to follow.

With a sweep of his hat,

Paul

So how would you all feel about the following suggestion:

“Standard” XP for modules becomes about half to three fifths (125 to 150XP) what it is now, as a baseline. If you play the adventure “correctly” (that is, you follow the story to its conclusion), you get “full standard XP”. Then there are additional things that can give more XP, up to double the “full standard”, such as completing SS missions, accomplishing things unrelated to the core story, and generally treating adventures as actual living experiences for your character?

SP’s give (on average) 250 XP. There should be no difference in XP across Tiers.

So how would you all feel about the following suggestion:

“Standard” XP for modules becomes about half to three fifths (125 to 150XP) what it is now, as a baseline. If you play the adventure “correctly” (that is, you follow the story to its conclusion), you get “full standard XP”. Then there are additional things that can give more XP, up to double the “full standard”, such as completing SS missions, accomplishing things unrelated to the core story, and generally treating adventures as actual living experiences for your character?
I’d love to see the amount of exp being given out taken down a notch, but I don’t feel that half exp should go to extras. Or am I seeing extra’s differently than you Tony? I assume you are talking more along the role-playing side. Handing a book you found to specific someone, or reporting movement of a faction to the goody goods in the area.

Giving huge exp portions to things like secret societies, races, churches, nations, casting source, etc may lead to big exp differences between character types.

Giving huge exp portions to things such as rare or extreme character choices will lead to frustrations.

I love the idea of rewarding people for their character choices. Having Artisan Painter, a wholly worthless skill, had big benefits during the delve. I loved that. Having Perform (X) was useful during the delve as well, despite Perform really just eating ranks otherwise. I like seeing things like when if you are a Hurrianic Aegis, this happens during the mod. The Tir Betoqi king will beg the action of a dwarven hero, and command as their king a Tir Betoqi hero.

I love the little bonuses you’ve been doing. Exp here and there for secret society missions. Exp for being a reaching out to your brethren in an mod here are there.

Also nothing says that the “Extra XP” has to add up right to 250 XP (Max). There could be the potential to earn 300-350 XP but you can only keep 250 XP. That way if someone didn’t get 1 thing (missing out on a story element, SS message, etc) but got 3 others, that might still be enough for XP.

I’d rather see ‘interesting rewards’ as the bonuses for completing side quests, SS missions, or otherwise rather than always XP. These can be things like Faction/Fame, special “one use favors”, discounts on things, etc. whatever is appropriate.

John