Controlled (?) Growth Concepts

[薔薇語]

Howdy HEROdom.

 

I'm using this thread for one main purpose to act as a storage place for some concepts I have for making growth in a game more controlled / free form. I like HERO because it is a point system (among other reasons) but point based systems have their own limitations. Experience always seemed odd to me. It seems like growth should really be out of the hands of the Player and in the hands of the PC/GM. By this I mean, skills should be increased because they are used by the PC. If half a dozen skills are used to great frequency in a particular period of time, then they should all increase and not be limited to the ones for which the Player has the points to increase. Likewise, powers should be introductions by the GM (based on Player desires of course) and upgrades on those powers should have some strong R.P. reasoning. To this End, I picture the best growth system as being one that never gives the Player points to work with but chances to shine On-Stage. (I'm told that this is very similar to Chaosism System for which I have little to no knowledge of).

 

Anyway, I've take up to writing down some of my thoughts on how one could introduce mechanics to this view of Character Growth. I was doing this most notably for the game that I will be running in the near future but also to help out another GM on these boards who liked my overall concept. Since there seemed to be at least one other person that expressed interest in my ideas, I thought I'd just post them so that anyone who wanted could review and use what they like (or reject it out of hand - Yes, I know who you are!)

 

What Follows is what I have written so far.

 

Enjoy!

 

Alas, the world of a GM is plague with numbers and calculations. If only to be a player and concerned only with “What’s my target number?” or “I know my Complication says I have a CvK, but the guy kicked a puppy!” Well, please praise your GM once again for taking the hit for the team. He has wisely chosen to handle the handing out of skill, talent, perk, and power upgrades. You, the Player, are now allowed to be free of concerns about “what should I do with my new 3 exp?”

 

The general guidelines for such a system are easy to grasp:

 

Thou shall not take Skill Roles in vain.

 

Too often people think of Skill roles as either being trivial, hindrances, or generally un-exciting. Not anymore. Each and every skill role is a chance to be a shining example to others (and yourself) of what to do or not to do. They are learning experiences. So, the more you use a skill, the more that skill is rewarded. So, please help out your skills and use them!

 

Every Skill role accounts for a +1 growth check. Every Critical skill role (fail or succeed) counts as a +3. When one achieves a total of +10 to any role, they get to increase that skill by one.

 

I’ve Got the POWER!

 

Power, Power, POWER! Yes it is true, you will now be in both greater and lesser control of your character’s powers. The game setting has been graciously designed by your GM to both allow you to ignore mechanics and focus on play. The thrust of this for you, the Player, is that, just like skills, powers are what you make of them. First things first, of course, and this one Can NOT be stressed enough, TALK TO YOUR GM!!! The GM may (or may not if he is particularly lazy) have a story to tell, but it is all about you (insert Uncle Sam Photo here). The most significant part of this portion is the start of the character creation process. Ask the GM where he wants to take this game in regards to powers and express to him what it is you want to see developed for your PC. Most often this is called the “It’d be cool if…” chart / discussion. Effective communication is key here. Let the GM know what you would like and wouldn’t want and why. This not only lets him know your personal goals but will give him intriguing (malicious, vindictive, or humorous) plot ideas.

 

Since powers are of such great consequence to the game, they require great responsibility. The GM is responsible for working in your tastes and you are responsible for living up to them. I.e., Chuck Norris didn’t develop his Chin-Fist by simply putting points into it, he spent a lot of time knocking people out with just the use of his Chin until he could finally master the growing of a fist from it. Make sense? (If it does, please seek immediate medical attention!). If you have the wonderful power to blast your enemies at a distance with fireballs and want to further develop that power (greater distance, effect, indirect, AoE, etc) then take a moment and tell your GM this. From that point on, make sure to attempt these feats On-Stage for everyone to see and bask in (Or bake in). Never be afraid to try something new and not listed in the power construction (that is what the power skill is for, duh…. Wait, you didn’t buy power?! Tsk, tsk.).

 

The rules for power development are much more fluid than those for skills because they have such an effect on the setting, and as such, the GM will make decisions in a more free form manner. What one can assume, however, is that for every On-Stage use of a power in a new / inventive manner (that succeeds ), that it will be given Cool-Points. Points will range from +1 to +3 depending on the level of cool (Ice Cold Awesome being +3). Once one reaches a total of 10 Cool-Points, one has earned the privilege to up their power. The manner in which the power is improved upon is up to the GM but should and will reflect the manner(s) in which you showcased your growth. Or, if you are lucky enough (Bad luck counts as luck, right?), the GM will throw in a curve ball and let you really get some fun out of it.

 

As a complimentary rule, one should think of Critical Success as providing an additional +1 to any Cool-Points earned (even if it would have gain +0, a critical Success makes it a +1). Critical Failures also add You live and you learn (YL^2) value to the score. Assume that every Critical Failure (Why do you keep failing? Buy new dice!) is equivalent to a +1 YL^2. If one achieves three (3) YL^2 points, then the GM alters or adds to the power in some strange way. It wasn’t that the Great Fire Mage kept forgetting how to cast a simple Craft Fire Spell, it was that he was about to become the Great Mage of Fire and Ice!

 

To sum everything up: Roll Playing games are about Roll Playing! For further assistance, please refer to my upcoming books: “Roll Playing for Dummies” and “Roll Playing and you: Confessions of a Teenage Roll Player.”

 

Comments? Questions? Concepts? Concerns?

 

La Rose.

---More to come as inspiration hits me.

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Controled (?) Growth Concepts

 

I like spending XP. My character, too.

[Peregrine]

Re: Controled (?) Growth Concepts

 

1. Build a class-and-levels system

 

Seriously.

 

HERO is a kit for building a game, not a game by itself. If you, the GM, want to control character progression, 30+ years of real-world RPG design (tabletop, MMORPG, etc.) has demonstrated that a class-and-levels system works extraordinarily well. It preserves schtick, limits the acquisition of abilities to the pattern you have created, and takes away much choice from the players, restricting them to choosing a class and then selecting from only the abilities offered by that class when they "level up". (As a side note, be wary of multi-classing, as the primary function it performs is to allow a character to bypass the limits you've established with the classes you've designed. You Have Been Warned).

[薔薇語]

Re: Controled (?) Growth Concepts

 

1. Build a class-and-levels system

 

The point of this concept isn't to design a class based system, and especially not to try and do it inside the HERO system. It isn't that at designated times people get boost to random skills and powers but that as the character makes use of something that something grows. I.e., the more I play black-jack and poker, the more adept I will become at gambling. The more Night-Crawler pushes his teleportation the more it grows.

 

All in all, it is designed to make growth/exp based on player/PC actions. This is in opt of the situations where the Player is given exp and then uses it to progress something that is either off the wall or makes less sense then another one. I.e., someone who buys up his OcV when they haven't actually gotten much chance to be in combat. Also it helps keep them from situations where they have several things that deserve to be progressed but have a limited amount of Exp. It just seems like a more realistic / fluid way to show the progression.

 

La Rose.

[azato]

Re: Controled (?) Growth Concepts

 

The Runequest system (I think at least) you have to use a skill during the game. Afterwards you roll and try to roll higher than your skill. If you succeed in that your skill goes up a predefined random percentage. The nice thing is that you can only impove the skills that you own AND it is easier to improve skills the more of a novice that a character is. Logical and balanced.

 

However, I don't care to add that complexity of either (x number of successes = a Y increase, figuring out a system like Runequest) for Hero. For logic and balance jsut applying some simple items could be done....

 

1. The GM not only awards the points but he also assigns where they are spent. Perhaps people spend a good deal of time in a city they gain KS:Area-City 8-.

 

2. Only allow the increase of skills to those actually used during the game OR that a chacter can justly explain (during the 4 months between campaigns my character is going to take a college class in X).

 

3. Limit the increase in skills/powers/attributes at one time.

 

I think a combination of the three makes good sense for heroic campaigns. I think "awarding" skills is a good thing since that is one area that players may avoid because of cost. This will give them fewer xp to spend on other things BUT it still gives them freedom to develop their characters how they want.

[Manic Typist]

Re: Controled (?) Growth Concepts

 

It's interesting, but I mostly achieve this sort of effect by tightly regulating how players spend XP. They don't get XP and then tell me what they are buying. I give it out to them in increments and they come to me to ask to buy certain things, and then give reasons for it if it's not immediately obvious. Or they ask for suggestions. If they want something but haven't an in-game explanation for it, I tell them to go make a point of roleplaying that out and we'll talk about it after a suitable amount of time has passed.

 

Sticking to your system, though-

I think 10 points is too few, OR, you should put a cap of how many can be gained per adventure. If a person defeats 10 locks in a row, the skill improves, all over the course of an hour? I'd suggest somewhere in the 3-5 range.

[Peregrine]

Re: Controled (?) Growth Concepts

 

The point of this concept isn't to design a class based system, and especially not to try and do it inside the HERO system. It isn't that at designated times people get boost to random skills and powers but that as the character makes use of something that something grows. I.e., the more I play black-jack and poker, the more adept I will become at gambling. The more Night-Crawler pushes his teleportation the more it grows.

 

All in all, it is designed to make growth/exp based on player/PC actions. This is in opt of the situations where the Player is given exp and then uses it to progress something that is either off the wall or makes less sense then another one. I.e., someone who buys up his OcV when they haven't actually gotten much chance to be in combat. Also it helps keep them from situations where they have several things that deserve to be progressed but have a limited amount of Exp. It just seems like a more realistic / fluid way to show the progression.

 

La Rose.

 

And the point that I was making is that what you are proposing is a half-measure that presents the appearance of offering HERO's flexibility to the players while in actuality keeping things firmly in the control of the GM. If you're going to do that, don't offer the insult (which is how I would receive it; others might feel differently) of the illusion of choice. Be honest about it and go ahead and restrict the choices in advance based on how you want the PCs to advance, and how quickly; a class-and-level system is both historically proven to achieve that objective and very familiar to most players.

[Wolf]

Re: Controled (?) Growth Concepts

 

See, I've been talking to Rose about this. And he's looking for a system wherein roleplay is enforced, as opposed to metagame considerations. For me this is coming up because of MMORPG gamers and D&D gamers coming to Hero. They see the powers as items to acquire, not as much builds to work with.

 

Most of the guys I now play with really enjoy the system, but look at the powers section, make a list of what they want, and then try to develop a concept around that.... it get's a bit hard. And when I try to tell them that the system is built to reason from special effect into the power, I normally just get either confusion or the explanation that "they don't build things that way."

 

A few of the tales... I'm showing my buddy the 6e PDF's, Upon seeing the Weapon Master, he imedieatly says, okay I want to re-concept my supers Paladin character to include this an play with it. Flipping through he also finds Regeneration, and Immediately want's this... He also want's Flash defense because he was flashed in the last game, and sees this as a hole in his defenses. None of these are reasons based on, "this is how I see my character." its all based on, here, we've got a cool new thing, and I want it. or I feel my character has a hole in his defenses...

 

(you should have seen when I showed him Power defense.... he still is wondering why he has to define it... "it's defending against adjustment powers, right? Okay, I want it." Me: "fine, what's the reason, what is the SFX, what is happening to make this power happen?" Him: I want it. Why do I have to justify it? The dude has Power defense, it's in the book, and I think he needs some.")

 

With another buddy, The issue was Str. We were in a "normals" game (my Cowboy Bebop/Firefly game to be exact) he was a Kickboxer who still played in the arena... and the mechanic... basically our bruiser/brick. So a High Str was to be expected. He was fully intending to push his Str to 30 (by double paying above 20, of course) I said, "Well, I'm not sure that I really want str that high without some form of Mechanical/robot/Chemical" issues, and he was a bit confused/ not really understanding. "20 is the middle, 30 is the max, I want to go to the max." me: "Yes, but look at what that max means, look at how much you can lift, and pull. Do you think even stretching the limit of human achievement you can justify that?" He relented, but again, he was just looking at it as a scale, not as an expression of his character. Another one he did is he wanted the Scientist as a "tweak" to make his science skills cheaper. I asked him if he thought that his character was anything like a prodigy for science, or anything that I can justify it with. His answer was no, but it made the science skills cheaper, so he should have it.

 

By working on, and creating little builds, that you allow, and then maybe give these type of players a choice of what they get, or giving them their powers, you enable them to be able to enjoy the game, while you enjoy it.

 

Making a system, a progression so that these guys get some idea of when they will achieve these things, will take some of the "arbitrary" feeling out if it.

 

I admit, I never really had a problem with my old group, they were pretty much a concept build group anyway, and that was before we found the Hero system. But now a days it's hard to keep the players understanding what your going after. Mostly when I put a DC Cap, the damage dice are immediately built to that cap, within the AP limits. The CV's are bought right up to that limit. I mean when everyone is playing with the "same character" but different SFX, the system looses something. Every attack is OCV 7, every defense is DCV 7, every damage is 12d6, every defense is 20... Sure one guy is "fast" the other guy is getting that because he's trained... But it makes it bland. The the players start wondering why they can't advance, "what do you mean I built at the cap, I was missing that guy with the 7 DCV, I want to hit him every time, I want a 9 OCV..."

 

Building a system to encounter these players is a good idea in my opinion. I'm working on a concept based on the Anime Bleach (some elements anyway) and I intend on "leveling" abilities with the player, but keeping it on a limited, "this is how I see this build" level. Where the player and the Character are a bit surprised when, how, and what their getting. I'm going to work with the players, and give them choices, I don't want to count them out of the process, but I do want to make it more that they can focus on their characters, and not on playing Pokemon ("gotta get 'em all) with the powers section of the book.

[Kristopher]

Re: Controlled (?) Growth Concepts

 

Moved at OP's request.

[薔薇語]

Re: Controlled (?) Growth Concepts

 

Moved at OP's request.

 

First and foremost, Thank you, Kris.

 

----

 

I think Wolf has aptly explained my motivation for this concept. It seems that sometimes people focus too little on the RPing (even good players) and too much on the Mechanics. The desire of implementing this method is to further push the players to utilize what they have and to encourage them beyond the basics to find ways to make use of their stats/skills/powers/etc and not use them as reactionary tools.

 

I also think that it stays consistent to a fundamental HERO philosophy of reasoning Mechanics from Special Effect. The Special Effect is the act of using X in game. As one uses X, the reasonable mechanic to accompany it is 'progression.'

 

----

 

Sticking to your system, though-

I think 10 points is too few, OR, you should put a cap of how many can be gained per adventure. If a person defeats 10 locks in a row, the skill improves, all over the course of an hour? I'd suggest somewhere in the 3-5 range.

 

The rule of 10 is not fixed in stone and should be adjusted up or down depending on GMing style. I personally don't force rolls that often and for me to force a roll on a single skill to the point that it grew in a single night, would be highly unlikely. For example, I wouldn't use the same trick twice (This door is locked. This door is locked, too. This door is locked, three. Etc). And in the instances where I do have such events (mostly because common sense would dictate such) then I would likely have either a single roll for all and reason out an outcome from that.

 

Of course take this and season to taste. The greatest goal of this is to spitball out ideas and to have fun with the mechanics.

 

Thanks for all the contributions, if you have ideas please post them. Concerns are also welcomed.

 

La Rose.

[jtelson]

Re: Controlled (?) Growth Concepts

 

I like it - it has a bit of the Chaosium feel (You've suceeded in using a skill relevantly, check at the end of the mission for improvement) and Marvel (Power Stunts were the thing I missed back in the 80's when we converted to Hero).

 

At a scan I would suggest that a familiarity with Power Skill (8<) be included free with each power - 'You can always try to do something cool if you're inspired during play' Much like Riding including a single TF at purchase.

[csyphrett]

Re: Controlled (?) Growth Concepts

 

That's no the system in action. That's the players telling you they don't care what you think of their characters, or what you think makes sense. They want to build their characters their way, not yours.

 

Restricting points to concepts is okay if the players like it enough to put up with it. On the other hand, there are always going to be players who see this as a restrictor plate and feel it's not going to be the GM's call how they spend points.

 

You're initial buy in is going to be getting players to agree to this, and there's going to be a certain percentage who won't in a point buy system.

CES

[jtelson]

Re: Controlled (?) Growth Concepts

 

Stunning: If one of the GM's in our group said they had an idea for something they'd want to try - particularly something like an optional advancement system that is tied your choices during play but really almost anything short of having to express actions through interpretive dance - I can't imagine any of us rejecting it out of hand.

 

Are there really a significant number of players out there whose experience is that absolutely tied to system?

[rjcurrie]

Re: Controlled (?) Growth Concepts

 

First of all, you seem to have confused "role" with "roll". Roll is what you do with dice. Role is a persona or a purpose. Normally, I wouldn't be this pedantic about it but it is actually a little bit confusing in your post.

 

For example, when you first mentioned "Skill Roles", I thought for a bit you were talking about the role that skills played in the game, not "Skill Rolls". And of course, at the end of the post, when you refer to roll-playing instead of role-playing, it also reads strange since "roll-playing" is often used as a derogatory term for games in which role-playing is minimized and often just result in die-rolling .

 

The approach that I like is less mechanical. Essentially, the GM needs to approve all XP expenditures and the players are told that the GM is more likely to approve expenditures that are a result of actual adventuring or described off-screen training. For example, if a character spends two hours everyday doing target practice, then it is probably appropriate to spend XP on OCV or if they are regularly taking French lessons, then buying the language is a logical approach.

 

The problem I see with your approach is that I could easily see it leading to arguments over whether or not dice should be rolled for a skill. For example, a player who might normally be happy to just have you say "fine, you do so" and not roll the dice may bristle at that approach when he realizes that that approach is going cost him in developing his skill. I could also see players going out of their way to find reasons to try to get to make skill rolls. Essentially, if players want to "game" the system, they'll find a way to do it.

 

Some people have mentioned the Runequest/Chaosium method of skill improvement and I must admit that my memories of Runequest were characters who carried multiple weapons and would use different ones in each combat so they could earn the right to roll for improvement with all of them.

 

In short, I've seen more logical development in games where players are encouraged to have their character development make sense (but without formal systems for determining what they can and cannot improve) than in games that use systems which force characters to do certain things to improve their abilities.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Controlled (?) Growth Concepts

 

Don't give the players character sheets.

 

Give them a picture of their character and a short (1 side A4, tops) prose piece describing their character - what they are good at, not so good at, what they like, what they do not like, what their powers are and such.

 

Then have them describe what they want to do.

 

It is not enforcing Role Play because they can still just say 'I want to hit MrX', ' I want to persuade MsY to....whatever', but it certainly encourages role play because the players are not simply looking up how good they are on a character sheet.

 

It also makes it more exciting: if you know you have Acrobatics 22-, well, leaping across a chasm and having to make a roll is purely routine if you know you almost can not fail. if you don't KNOW that your numbers are that high, you don't fail any more, but there is a lot more tension.

[csyphrett]

Re: Controlled (?) Growth Concepts

 

Stunning: If one of the GM's in our group said they had an idea for something they'd want to try - particularly something like an optional advancement system that is tied your choices during play but really almost anything short of having to express actions through interpretive dance - I can't imagine any of us rejecting it out of hand.

 

Are there really a significant number of players out there whose experience is that absolutely tied to system?

 

All my experiences have been bad. Uniformly disasterously bad. I don't know if which part of the population of gamers I am in, but every game (3-4) I have sat in where the GM decides what goes where, has been nothing but a trial.

CES

[Ice9]

Re: Controlled (?) Growth Concepts

 

One issue with this is that power use frequency isn't the same thing as how important a power is, or even how good the character should be with it. For instance:

 

1) A thunder mage can call forth lightning. For minor use, he can make a small thunderclap which knocks someone over and briefly stuns them. He can also go full-out and call down a huge lightning storm, but this exhausts him and would cause collateral damage anywhere with people around. Because of this, he generally uses the thunderclap and saves the lightning storm for last-ditch situations. As a result, the thunderclap keeps growing in power while the lightning storm doesn't - eventually, the "minor" thunderclap is actually more powerful.

 

2) A delivery man, caught up in a web of conspiracies, begins developing luck powers. Since the character (not the player) is totally unaware what's going on, it makes no sense for him to intentionally try using new powers or training them before they appear. As a result, there's really no way for him to gain any new powers in this system.

 

3) A mad scientist has rocket boots, among his other inventions. He uses them all the time. But using them frequently isn't going to make them better, and if he decides to upgrade something, it wouldn't necessarily be the rocket boots - they work fine already.

[Duke Bushido]

Re: Controlled (?) Growth Concepts

 

Apologies to all if I missed this being covered; I read through the thread first and didn't notice it.

 

At any rate:

 

I like it as a general idea, particularly if you do have role playing shortcomings in your group.

 

 

However, the "success by 10+ allows faster / better gains" thing (paraphrased):

 

Doesn't this rather load it so that those with higher skill levels will be most likely to advance faster? As the character's skill improves, his expertise will begin to grow at increasingly unrealistic levels.

 

Or did I miss some sort of check for this effect?

 

All in all, though, very well thought-out.

[torchwolf]

Re: Controlled (?) Growth Concepts

 

... However, the "success by 10+ allows faster / better gains" thing (paraphrased):

 

Doesn't this rather load it so that those with higher skill levels will be most likely to advance faster? As the character's skill improves, his expertise will begin to grow at increasingly unrealistic levels.

 

Or did I miss some sort of check for this effect?

 

All in all, though, very well thought-out.

 

That is indeed the problem with it - successful skill use is likelier with higher skill rolls, and if success gives you improvement faster, you accelerate this imbalance further.

 

On the Chaosium system: as pointed out, a successful skill roll allows you a chance to improve a skill by rolling over it, allowing ease for improving low skill rolls, and improvement getting progressively harder. That system is random, though, not point-based.

 

Suggestion for a variant for Hero (this would probably work best in heroic campaigns):

1) Use XP Chart, but multiply by 10. Note each ability that was used in a clever, constructive, or useful way and note pts assigned for this purpose (adjusting a few pts up or down at GM leisure).

2) Each Skill costs as many points to improve by 1 as their current roll is.

 

Example: Lockpicking at 12-, requires 12 points to increase by 1. It was used in a fairly clever way to gain critical access during last session, but no big frills beyond that - 10 points assigned, plus 1 because the player played it out entertainingly. With 1 more point, Lockpicking can be increased. The 11 assigned so far are noted by GM and/or player by campaign preference.

[薔薇語]

Re: Controlled (?) Growth Concepts

 

First of all' date=' you seem to have confused "role" with "roll". Roll is what you do with dice. Role is a persona or a purpose. Normally, I wouldn't be this pedantic about it but it is actually a little bit confusing in your post.[/quote']

 

No problem, Rj. It is common for me to switch the two around. I will go back and proof read it for this error. Thanks.

 

The approach that I like is less mechanical. Essentially' date=' the GM needs to approve all XP expenditures and the players are told that the GM is more likely to approve expenditures that are a result of actual adventuring or described off-screen training.[/quote']

 

My issue with this method is the same I have with just setting static rules. The PCs start to focus on the game mechanics more than the game/setting. If the GM must constantly be watching and 'approving,' it takes time away. Plus, I personally don't like being the GM who has to say No to the player. This method avoids that (barring unusual situations) by setting down a mechanical system for most basic upgrades.

 

The problem I see with your approach is that I could easily see it leading to arguments over whether or not dice should be rolled for a skill. For example' date=' a player who might normally be happy to just have you say "fine, you do so" and not roll the dice may bristle at that approach when he realizes that that approach is going cost him in developing his skill. I could also see players going out of their way to find reasons to try to get to make skill rolls. Essentially, if players want to "game" the system, they'll find a way to do it. [/quote']

 

This is one of the main distinctions between Chaosium (from what I understand of it anyway) and my method. I have no roll after the session/arc. Either you gain the increase or you don't. Switching off to a variety of weapons would help one develop a variety of weapons but not out of proportion with their use.

 

Don't give the players character sheets.

 

Give them a picture of their character and a short (1 side A4, tops) prose piece describing their character - what they are good at, not so good at, what they like, what they do not like, what their powers are and such.

 

 

It also makes it more exciting: if you know you have Acrobatics 22-, well, leaping across a chasm and having to make a roll is purely routine if you know you almost can not fail. if you don't KNOW that your numbers are that high, you don't fail any more, but there is a lot more tension.

 

I've thought about this before. It actually have a certain appeal to me as both a player and GM. I thought of doing it once for a Star HERO game I ran but decided against it. I think that it pulls the player's sense of control away and becomes too much of a Role-play and not enough Roll-play game (Yes, Rj, I mean to use them in that way.)

 

One issue with this is that power use frequency isn't the same thing as how important a power is, or even how good the character should be with it. For instance:

 

 

1. I don't see too much of a problem with that. I.e., using the minor power more than the major power equals greater growth of minor power than major. If I am playing in a Dark Champions game and I have two basic & distinct weapons: .45 cal and Rocket Launcher. Since I understand the effects of using the R.L., I choose to use the .45 more often. As such, my skill (OcV) with the .45 increases more often than my R.L. one. Eventually, my use of the .45 will put it over the top as compared to the R.L.

 

2. I can not recall if it was mentioned in the initial post since I have been doing two things at once, but I have what I call the "It'd be cool if..." discussion / chart. The Idea is that powers (among other things) are developed over time by the GM. The Player states what he would like to see in the way of progression and the GM helps nudge it that way. If the Player wanted a luck based PC, then the GM should start to give him those basic powers based on story progression. Eventually the Player / PC start to put Two and Two together and work on their newly acquired ability.

 

3. The power development doesn't have to be just on the power itself. It could reflect increases to Power Skill or other Skills. If there isn't any reasonable way for it to increase (which is rare), then the GM should use the earned Exp and use it for other cool effects that the Player would like. Maybe the Mad Scientist, from repeated use of his boots figures out how to make new ones that are better tweaked out. Maybe he gets inspiration to build another item. Sky's the limit! .

 

Apologies to all if I missed this being covered; I read through the thread first and didn't notice it.

 

However, the "success by 10+ allows faster / better gains" thing (paraphrased):

 

Doesn't this rather load it so that those with higher skill levels will be most likely to advance faster? As the character's skill improves, his expertise will begin to grow at increasingly unrealistic levels.

 

No, the success level of an individual skill roll does not matter (except for Crits). Only that one succeeds. A GM could grant greater benefit for a high success level, but that is a further tweaking of my current system.

 

Now as for Higher Skill levels causing skill rolls to be succeeded more often, and thus causing a cyclical effect in skill growth, that is a just concern. This also ties into Rj's point about situations where the GM says "you pass, don't roll" causing them to miss out on a chance for an increase. I think that is a warranted instance for them to miss out. Why? Because the mechanic of 'progression' (what I am calling this system for now) is suppose to simulate the further development of a skill. If the PC isn't challenged by an activity, then they shouldn't benefit from doing it. I.e., me taking a shot-gun and shooting a barn wall from twenty feet doesn't constitute a challenge and hasn't really helped me progress in my skill. Now the GM could always give generic bonuses to any skill / power / whatnot whenever they like. That is up to the GM isn't accounted for in this mechanic.

 

Thank you for all the comments and well wishes.

 

La Rose.

[薔薇語]

Re: Controlled (?) Growth Concepts

 

The approach that I like is less mechanical. Essentially' date=' the GM needs to approve all XP expenditures and the players are told that the GM is more likely to approve expenditures that are a result of actual adventuring or described off-screen training. For example, if a character spends two hours everyday doing target practice, then it is probably appropriate to spend XP on OCV or if they are regularly taking French lessons, then buying the language is a logical approach.[/quote']

 

This was touched on in my previous post, but I think it warrants a more direct reply. The GM should always feel free to increase any mechanic (stat, skill, etc) at any time for any reason they see fit. If they think such off screen activities warrant a bonus, then they should give it to them.

 

The problem I see with your approach is that I could easily see it leading to arguments over whether or not dice should be rolled for a skill. For example' date=' a player who might normally be happy to just have you say "fine, you do so" and not roll the dice may bristle at that approach when he realizes that that approach is going cost him in developing his skill. I could also see players going out of their way to find reasons to try to get to make skill rolls. Essentially, if players want to "game" the system, they'll find a way to do it. [/quote']

 

Part one this paragraph was discussed at the end of my previous post. The second part, however, deserve discussion as well. The simple answer to "What if players go out of their way to find ways to use a skill and thus game the 'progression' mechanic?" is "let them!" If a PC can find a way to display a skill they have and in a manner warranting skill progression, then they deserve it. That effect is one of the desired effects of this new mechanic. It is to try and encourage PCs to think inventively and use what they have available to them while still benefiting those that stay with the tried and true methods.

 

Suggestion for a variant for Hero (this would probably work best in heroic campaigns):

1) Use XP Chart, but multiply by 10. Note each ability that was used in a clever, constructive, or useful way and note pts assigned for this purpose (adjusting a few pts up or down at GM leisure).

2) Each Skill costs as many points to improve by 1 as their current roll is.

 

Example: Lockpicking at 12-, requires 12 points to increase by 1. It was used in a fairly clever way to gain critical access during last session, but no big frills beyond that - 10 points assigned, plus 1 because the player played it out entertainingly. With 1 more point, Lockpicking can be increased. The 11 assigned so far are noted by GM and/or player by campaign preference.

 

Interesting idea . I do think that is worth looking at. It helps make greater skill growth more time consuming and provides a consistent mechanic. Thanks for the idea, Torch.

 

La Rose.

[Duke Bushido]

Re: Controlled (?) Growth Concepts

 

In the spirit of sharing, since you've put up your system for encouraging Skill use and development, I'll post ours:

 

Essentially, we use a "pips" system. When a character uses his Skill, pass or fail, he gets a pip. Spectacular success (roll of 5 or less if your target number is above 12; roll of 3 if it is below 12) grants 2 pips, and Stellar Success (roll of 3 when your target number is 17-) grants five pips if your unmodified Skill roll is 13-; three pips if it is above 13-.

 

While players are free to spend any earned XP they want on Skills, ten pips translate specifically to 1 "free" XP to spend specifically on the Skill for which they were earned.

 

It's not drastic, as progression in combat-heavy games tends to be slower, but games that feature a good bit of role playing or story-developing sequences make it a worthwhile reward. It's also not particularly "game breaking," as it's unusual for a character to gain free XP out of proportion to the rate of normal XP.

 

Not suggesting; just sharing.