Experience purchases done through role play

[TheDarkness]

I said a little bit about this before in another thread, figured I'd put it here.

 

When I award experience, I always require that somehow it's use is role played. There are four reasons I do this:

 

1. It makes for more consistent story and narrative

 

2. It avoids a lot of munchkin silliness without me having to look at the way someone spent it, and tell them no

 

3. It tends to produce much more interesting characters for me and the players, with more nuanced expenditure and better thought out mechanics.

 

4. It creates scenarios

 

Now, I know some feel it's their experience, and they should get to spend it how they want, but the game is a mutually crafted story as well, stupid expenditures hurt everyone in terms of fun, what kind of game they get to play, and what kind of headaches people are willing to bother the GM with when they know better. I'm not averse to experimental builds that might be dodgy, I am annoyed if I'm handed something that is just a veiled attempt to slip something past me. Players get to spend experience if they have or do role play the development.

 

As for the specific points:

 

1. It makes for more consistent story and narrative(and smoother game play)

 

Character 1 has two weeks between scenarios, and has earned some points, perhaps saved a few. So he buys 10 points of strength, going from a weak guy to quite the athlete. In two weeks. Hey, Spider Man was all wiry last month, now he's built like Bane. Sure, he could explain the expenditure by way of comic book chaos, that beam that hit him before must have boosted his strength. That's fine. Until another large odd change. Soon, this player will have mutated faster in three weeks and in odder ways more than any comic book characters does in the span of three dozen issues.

 

Add to that the character who is already quite the shot, one of the best OCVs in the group, whose last two scenarios did not put him against anything particularly close to testing his skill with his firearms. Two weeks later, his OCV jumps again.

 

The teleporter of the group develops a new teleport power that is combat ready the first time he actually does it.

 

Never mind the guy who buys four CSLs on the weekend.

 

Using these examples, the first, the guy who wants more strength, if recent scenarios have involved him in a fair amount of physically demanding things, hey, a point or two is understandable. If he's hoping for more, maybe he sets aside time, but he's going to have to be patient to get 10 more. If he's not patient, he can certainly go the crazy mutation/act of the comic book gods route, everyone does it, BUT, too many of those makes random mutations for your character part of the overall story, and it would be rather inconsistent story wise if we had to wait for him to accrue experience before the next dynamic life changing mutation. If he's already recently used too many acts of god for an experience expenditure, and doesn't want to suddenly wake up with a giant lolling frog tongue, I'm sure he can find something else useful to spend it on. Hey, didn't he do a few Presence Attacks? He could spend on that. He could buy a gun on his break. Whatever, as long as I don't have to ignore that he's transmogrifying faster than Cthulhu in a funhouse mirror.

 

The second guy, the crack shot who wants to spend a chunk on OCV, but really hasn't had much shooting lately. he could talk to a teammate, set up a scenario. The team teleporter or telekinetic could run him through the ringer, having him walk a course while teleporting/ moving targets all over the place. The team brick could provide a live target and some challenge. Actually make a team danger room game so that that trait is worked on in different ways, and the other team members can either lend support or team up against him, see how many he can take out.

 

The team teleporter likewise sets up the idea for the new power, then does danger room games using it as an improvised use, temporarily giving the power an activation roll to represent that it's not combat ready yet. I let him choose to play the danger room game on the off time: at the point where I think he's worked it enough(even if, especially if he's been rolling terribly on the activation roll, but has worked on it alot), I just let it work without the roll, it's combat ready.

 

The guy who gets four CSLs on the weekend had better have been in the thick of it against great foes for a while, and he's still going to have to do some danger room sparring of a variety of types in order to solidify the skill, unless he's really been in the thick of it for a long time, living on the edge and saving everyone's keisters from slim odds. If that's not the case, he could train and get one or two over a period of time, but four?

 

In short, if they want to buy what they want to be, they've got to play what they want to be.

 

 

2. It avoids a lot of munchkin silliness without me having to look at the way someone spent it, and tell them no

 

This one's straightforward. See buying four CSLs when you don't see that much combat. See buying mental defense because you think you're going to face a mentalist. How did you get more mental defense? Do you even personally know a mentalist? What, you, who has zero experience with mentalists, built a mental protection helmet? Really? And as GM, I have to explain this to players who actually did a build that makes sense? And then, shall we begin the powers escalation. Can I get regeneration for 300, Alex?

 

Want to strengthen mental defenses, tell me how that happens, if it's reasonable, I'll go with it. It might actually require a scenario of its own. Or, save your act of god for this one, that's fair game.

 

And of course, just because the character got totally controlled once, does not mean that now that character has role played gaining will enough to resist. Some will power, perhaps.

 

It's role play. If a player is worried about a mentalist, they need to figure out what that mentalist is worried about in the role play, and not just warp a character build in a doomed quest to be resistant to everything.

 

When the players know this, they tend to present less silliness. Or make really clever arguments for the silliness. Which can be fun.

 

Even if I still say no.

 

 

3. It tends to produce much more interesting characters for me and the players, with more nuanced expenditure and better thought out mechanics.

 

When players are not in an arms race for SPD, EGO, CSLs, what have you, they actually try to slowly beef up the things they worry about as weaknesses, but which they can only justify a point or two at a time being spent on, and find interesting ways to spend their other experience. Let's face it, it burns a hole in their pockets, and they get looking through the books at things they never thought about buying before, finding weird ways to work things in their character.

 

When they do danger room type games to test new things, they can test the power before their fighting an enemy, against other players, who will undoubtedly point out if the power's build is unbalanced while it is in the 'testing' phase where I am still requiring an activation roll. They can fix it before the broken build ends up taking out my key bad guy (sadly, ALWAYS before I realize the build is broken).

 

Plus, they will do scenarios against each other with the intent of outsmarting each other, subteams using their powers to complement each other(while I secretly watch and consider how their enemies need to respond to keep up a fun balance during actual scenarios.)

 

Further, they engage in actual scenarios in a way that will get them the experience expenditures they want, instead of altering their build every time they discover that some other power could be a problem for them.

 

4. It creates scenarios

 

This one is straight forward. Want to build that mental shield helmet, but have no experience with mentalists? Might need to search out someone who does. Got a long hiatus? Might be just the time to climb to that hidden mountain temple you heard about, the one you have to fight your way in to get trained there.

 

Want to buy off your hunted?

 

As GM, these could all be opportunities for fun games. It's not my goal to make it unduly hard to spend the experience, these sorts of side scenarios shouldn't always be too difficult, but more a way to broaden the world and allow the characters to develop in a way that actually represents the players' triumphs in-game.

[TheDarkness]

Forgot one:

 

5. Gives a chance to test things before major scenarios

 

All the danger room stuff is handy, because undoubtedly players will come up with something that I was not familiar with, and we can all figure it out then, instead of making a big suspense moment drag on while we figure out that the power does or doesn't do what we thought.

[Tasha]

Why this is total bs

 

1) It frustrates the heck out of players who don't have the foresight to play your mindgames.

 

Sorry, what you are saying is that if I can't plan ahead and tell you that my character isn't training (something that many characters just do anyways) with a mind to extend a certain skill or power. That you will say No sorry, wait until I decide that you are worthy of spending the points that you earned.

 

2) it overcomplicates something that is there to add fun to a game

 

3) WTH do you think motivates someone to learn something new? It can't be because they found a need to know how to do something new to fill some gap in their experiences.

 

4) It motivates players to not try anything new with the character. Instead they do small incremental updates that don't amount to much.

 

---

Usually players change complications for two reasons. One is they get sick of the same villain showing up for no reason way too often. Two they figure that they are done with that villain and want to try something new. 

 

Any Stat Arms race is the fault of the GM. It doesn't matter if the Player spends Exp willy nilly or with your over complicated scheme. A Player increases OCV because they seem to miss a lot (which may be an issue if the GM has villains that are 4 or more DCV higher than the PC's OCV). DCV increases are the same way, if the slowest brick hits the Speedster and martial artist with ease, then the PC's are going to feel the need to increase a stat. SPD increases tend to be because players perceive that all of the NPCs and Villains have way more actions than they do. If everyone wants Flash defense it's probably because Flash attacks are pretty common in the game.

 

I allow Players to spend exp as they like (I tend to not get many players wanting to start the stat arms race often). I work with the player to come up with a backstory where it's needed. Sometimes I don't even sweat it at all. (ie PC is constantly using Computer Programing and wants a higher roll or to widen it to other areas within the skill). Buying off hunteds and other complications, I will try to set up something where they make peace with the hunted or I come up with a short story bit where the thing is explained. Again, I find that Players who want to get rid of complications are because the GM is abusing or over using the complication. Same with limitations. Every punitive action a GM makes though their adventure has a ripple effect within the campaign. 

[Tasha]

In other words don't sweat the little stuff. Players spending exp is putting way too much stress into something that shouldn't be stressful.

[TheDarkness]

I think one thing got lost in translation. If they are training, I have no problem them gaining a skill. But the danger room stuff is actually game play time, it's not "I practice in the danger room", it's scenarios that are fairly low key, have some beers, hassle the GM for the hell of it, etc.

 

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't feel it's a mind game to expect everyone, myself included, to try to make a good story of it, even and especially when it's often a surprising story even to me, who might have thought I'd know how it would go. And I completely understand that gamers who simply want to blow off steam gaming, and aren't as much into the story of it, don't want to play that sort of game. I am upfront about this being the rules, they choose to play, they seem to like it, for a lot of the reasons I stated above.

 

That said, I totally disagree that arms races are always the fault of the GM, except in cases where the GM does not make clear that power gaming is or isn't the goal to the players. There are plenty of players who live for munchkins and escalation. Some of flexible, some are not. Some are upfront about it, some think the game is for their sole entertainment and will blow everyone else's evening in the process.

 

Essentially, I do not railroad a single story element. I am constantly changing my plans because the players have their own, and enjoy it. I don't have any problems with this, never have had one player upset about this approach to experience, as I never actually recommend what they should spend their points on, only that it's part of the role play, however they make that happen is their choice. Raising Ego over a long stretch while also expanding other abilities of the character is the same end result as buying the ego in bulk, but far more organic, with the big purchases being fewer, but standing out waaaaay more for the player, and not screwing the narrative that everyone is working for. These meaningless purchases are often the same purchases spread over time as what you deem meaningful, they seem to be challenged by their foes(the ones meant to be challenging) but not swamped, and they seem to be effective for their levels at what they have chosen to be effective at, and less effective outside of their expertise, so they cover each others' butts instead of feeling a need to draw away purchasing power from their original goals to make themselves quickly immune to everything.

 

So, 1. No foresight required, they know upfront, and generally are experienced gamers, so they play the character they want it to be, 2. I do not consider excuses to do danger room days or side scenarios for them to be overcomplicated, and they often may choose those scenarios, or ask for them, 3. I never said they could not learn something new, I believe I was clear in saying that it merely has to be roleplayed, they can choose how, or I can help, and, in many cases, it may already have been(for example, improvising with a power in a combat), and 4. No, it motivates them to role play well, are you seriously suggesting that it is even possible to make a Champions player not add new things? If someone is playing Champions, they are probably tinkering, the system doesn't attract a lot of people who aren't as far as I can tell on this board, judging from the number of builds one can find for a toaster oven with broiler option.

 

So, I hold it's not BS. Mind you, the experienced people, as you stated, tend not to do the arms race, and enjoy the role play. I am not railroading people into this, I am quite upfront and I make great efforts to make it fun, and integrate their experience expenditures into the fun, even when part of that is them keeping their new power secret from their friends.

[TheDarkness]

As a last point, campaign caps, which I don't know if you use, are exactly the same, telling a player what they can do with the experience they earned. I would not characterize campaign caps as a 'mind game', but they are literally the same thing, except they may be an ultimate cap, whereas what I am describing is merely periodic, and does not prevent players from saving points over time for large purchases, and finding ways to make those purchases work.

 

Again, in my experience, it has led to players really planning out what they want their character to be and making that happen, and, along the way, finding cool stuff that augments that image while they build up into their goal character. Yes, it's a slower process, but I am upfront about it, so characterizing it as a mind game is patently false.

[TheDarkness]

I allow Players to spend exp as they like (I tend to not get many players wanting to start the stat arms race often). I work with the player to come up with a backstory where it's needed. Sometimes I don't even sweat it at all. (ie PC is constantly using Computer Programing and wants a higher roll or to widen it to other areas within the skill). Buying off hunteds and other complications, I will try to set up something where they make peace with the hunted or I come up with a short story bit where the thing is explained. Again, I find that Players who want to get rid of complications are because the GM is abusing or over using the complication. Same with limitations. Every punitive action a GM makes though their adventure has a ripple effect within the campaign. 

To make clear, almost everything in this paragraph I agree with. The character who uses their computer skills constantly HAS roleplayed the cause of their experience expenditure. The character who wants to buy off hunteds has maybe a small roleplay that does this, I provide this the same way you are talking about. I tend not to overuse limitations beyond when they just come up, and haven't actually had someone's hunted appear without an overall place in campaigns, almost never using those hunteds for a fallback as a random scenario for exactly the reasons you state, as well as because those things should provide story for the character and the game, not an excuse for me not to work out a good scenario because hey, they've got this hunted.

 

I just draw a distinction between things people have worked on, and am loathe to have characters come back from a weekend break in game time with 6 new CSLs. They usually wait until they know that they have a break in which to train, and, for six levels, this usually will mean training with one of the more combat oriented team mates, which adds flavor, imo. Powers are a bit different, especially if the power relates closely to what they already have, and one or two skill levels or improvements in expertise in a short time does not break the narrative that the whole group is working on. This generally equates to characters buying skills that they want to improve in consistent, if modest, chunks, others adding new slots to VPPs, and most putting some aside and eyeballing whatever their big dream purchase is. And, since I do require it to be roleplayed, I don't just leave it to them to tell me, I ask them as we move along in sessions what they are training or what they are planning on buying.

[Hugh Neilson]

Simple answer: My character will be a genius scientist who created his own powers. Voila - he was able to create them, so he is able to modify them.

 

I'm with Tasha that imposing extra roadblocks to players spending their xp is far more trouble than it's worth. The player who provides glib explanations, or just picks the right background, can spend his xp as he pleases, and the player whose vision of his character may not match yours discovers it's not really HIS character after all.

 

I've often bought new abilities bit by bit (eg. not +1 SPD for 10 points, but +1 SPD, activation 8-, for 3 points, then spend a point at a time reducing that activation roll until the extra SPD works every turn). Does that fit better with your model? Maybe. It works for me. But if someone instead wants to save up 10 points and buy +1 SPD all at once, why does he need special dispensation to do so? Note that he has done without any benefit of the 3+ points until he got to 10 - viewed one way, I gamed the system and started benefiting from my points (sometimes the activation succeeds) way sooner. Viewed another, I role played gaining my new SPD point.

 

Your comments suggest the characters are consistently spending 10+ xp at a time. I don't find 10+ xp often gets awarded all at once, so the player is already foregoing benefits from his xp as he decides what to do with it,

 

Campaign caps are, to my mind, different. They do not say "persuade me that you deserve to spend your xp in the manner you desire", but "that use of xp is not permitted, for anyone, period". That's no different than not letting your Modern Superspy character learn to cast magic spells, or vetoing that Fantasy Dwarf sprouting wings so he can fly.

[TheDarkness]

 

 

I'm with Tasha that imposing extra roadblocks to players spending their xp is far more trouble than it's worth. The player who provides glib explanations, or just picks the right background, can spend his xp as he pleases, and the player whose vision of his character may not match yours discovers it's not really HIS character after all.

 

This is a straw man fallacy. I have repeatedly stated I do not choose what people spend their experience on. If the player, given the opportunity and asked what he is training/working on, observed in what his character is actually doing most commonly, communicates his or her intentions, which they almost always do, I try to accommodate them. However, and again, it sticks out like a sore thumb if you have a milquetoast turn into a competent hth combatant over the weekend with no warning. Or suddenly, the day after one encounter with their first mentalist opponent, they are buying a ton of mental defense, the narrative and the balance almost always suffer for this. Problems soon become more often solved with builds than role plays.

 

These players may certainly buy some mental defense after such a situation. But if every buy is a drastic re-imagining of the character, it becomes tedious for everyone. It really is not unusual for games to expect that, barring certain unusual situations, which are more common in comics, but not as common as some players will try to make it, that developing skills requires time or it feels incredibly corny. Their vision doesn't have to match mine, nor has a single thing I said supported that statement. It has to fit in the story that player and the rest have been making, it has to fit the character the way he has been playing it, if he's trying to branch out, he needs to do so in-game, or figure out how to do so, and I'm happy to accommodate that.

 

 

 

But if someone instead wants to save up 10 points and buy +1 SPD all at once, why does he need special dispensation to do so? Note that he has done without any benefit of the 3+ points until he got to 10 - viewed one way, I gamed the system and started benefiting from my points (sometimes the activation succeeds) way sooner. Viewed another, I role played gaining my new SPD point.

 

You'll note that those examples match none of the ones I provided. I have no problems with any of those buys, including the speed.

 

 

 

Your comments suggest the characters are consistently spending 10+ xp at a time. I don't find 10+ xp often gets awarded all at once, so the player is already foregoing benefits from his xp as he decides what to do with it,

 

I have several times stated many players will be saving points. And planning how to make their additions to the story that the new build may entail fit seamlessly into the story. Getting experience and spending a tiny amount for something helpful, but saving the rest for something bigger. But they, and I, all find it odd if every third week people have remarkable abilities that are in no way explainable by any narrative the player has taken part in or provided.

 

 

 

Campaign caps are, to my mind, different. They do not say "persuade me that you deserve to spend your xp in the manner you desire", but "that use of xp is not permitted, for anyone, period".

 

'Deserve' is just a way to muddy the water.

 

Do the work to your own character's story to explain things, or don't get into a heavy role playing game is more like it. If it's too obtrusive to the narrative as everyone, that player included, has set up, slip it in over time. And caps are a flat out command that you cannot spend your points, that you earned, the way you want if it means you want to go over that cap.

 

It's the same.

 

In one case, all players have to, where necessary, using group consensus and common sense, slip in buys in a way that works with the narrative, letting some be big and dramatic, some, especially those that that character can come up with no better rationale for than "I'm a genius, so five CSLs is totally something I can do over the weekend", may need phasing in, because they sound stupid to everyone, usually even the player attempting them when you go "Really, Saturday you got beat up by a possessed little girl with 6 STR, today you're a master of the peekaboo style, because you're a genius?"

 

In the other case, all players have to accept the dictate of the GM on what stats can't go higher than what.

 

Now, we could interpret the first as some kind of Svengali GM, and the second as a jackbooted dictatorial monster, but both would be patently ridiculous interpretations.

 

If someone chooses to play in a story heavy game, and makes silly builds that are inexplicable even by their standards and stick out in the story, and it has been explained that's how the game is, no one is being hypnotized and having their rights taken away if people go, "Bob, don't be stupid."

 

Seriously, not a complaint in any system I've run, and I've played this way for years. Likewise, never bullied a player to choose a particular thing.

[TheDarkness]

To illustrate something that has and does happen.

 

A character, we'll say this is a gadgeteer, has stockpiled points for a while, thinking to do something with it, then finds out his original idea is not a legal build. He's got the points, but no plan at the moment. Then, during a busy week, he is in a combat and gets tired of having problems when opponents get close to him. Right then and there, he decides he wants to use his stockpile to buy those CSLs.

 

Now, if tomorrow, I know there is more going on(and especially if he knows), and there is no way to explain the sudden change, he just wants the skills as skills, I'll talk with him and say, look, coming up, there's some down time, we'll get you in the dojo with No-Shadow, it'll be fun, can you just play the remainder as is, then we'll do that, it'll represent your intensive training, you can get used to the new options it opens for you, and then, the next enemy you meet, you'll not only have the skills, but you'll know what they actually do for you with your other powers, and you will totally look great.

 

If he says no, then he has to come up with the narrative explanation that is not totally ridiculous. More often than not, they're fine with it. In fact, pretty much always.

 

I don't discourage him from ultimately buying what he wants to buy. If he wants, he could just buy one for now, since he has seen some combat lately. Then buy the rest during the break. And have added experience that he might spend on things that he realizes will work well with his new skills.

 

If this does not work, only then do I hold up the spinning disk while swinging my pocket watch in front of his eyes.

[TheDarkness]

Whether done immediately or after a wait, I have never seen a player doing anything other than greedily spending their experience. Just like in everyone else's games.

[BoloOfEarth]

I generally allow my players to spend XP as they see fit (though adding an entirely new power that is a "!" or "stop sign" would still require GM approval).  Has this resulted in players buying up Mental Defense after a rough time fighting a mentalist (to use TheDarkness' example)?  Yes, it has. 

 

Very recently, Honey Badger (who started the game with no Mental Defense and a 10 EGO and PRE despite his catch phrase of "Honey Badger Don't Care" implying a strong will) got curb-stomped by a mentalist's Mind Blasts, and subsequently bought 12 Mental Defense.

 

Before that, the team mage bought off the "Incantations" limitation on all of his spells after a villain completely shut him down with a simple Silence field.  He told me afterward that he had been saving up XP for exactly that possibility, but no mention was made to me beforehand. 

 

I had no problem in either case.  I figure, that's the beauty of a point-based system.  Players make their choices.  If they're spending XP in a reactionary form, they aren't spending it in a proactive form.  (IOW, if they want to spend points to protect from past successful attacks, they aren't spending them to buy a cool completely new power.)  And since we alternate games in my group, there's often an off-week or two between my adventures, thus allowing for relatively significant changes to characters.

 

Heck, I've done the same thing with the villains.  Maker used her EMP to shut down WarNun's battlesuit, but WarNun escaped.  So instead of spending points on CSLs (which would have been my plan), WarNun spent XP on an Impenetrable rED force field to protect herself from Maker's EMP. 

[TheDarkness]

Honey Badger!

 

Really, what I like about the approach I use, is that with all the training with other characters and NPCs, the main battles have a lot less of the 'what's the ruling on this?' moments, and a lot more of me going 'holy !@#$! Where'd they come up with that. Escape rout B! Escape route B! Archvillains and demons first, guard the rear, my faithful, but expendable thugs!'

 

And often, for example, if they are worried about something, like a mentalist, their first response is not always to buy things, but to make allies that can help with that problem.

[massey]

I figure my character already had the stuff he's spending XP on.  He just hadn't used it yet.  Golden Age Superman didn't "gain" the ability to fly or use heat vision, even though he didn't use it in 1938.  He always had those powers..

 

My 10 Str character has always been muscular.  Now that I've got 10 XP, and he goes to 20 Str, we're just finally getting an accurate reading of his Str.

 

If I go from 12 Ego to 18 Ego and 12 Mental Defense, what does that look like?  I still look the same.  All we know is that in our first encounter, Dr. Mentato cleaned my clock.  In our second encounter, I'm ready for him.  He hits me with his mental attacks, and I grit my teeth and tough it out.  Grrr.

 

What does a combat skill level look like?  If I'm Archer Joe, and I've got a 9 base OCV and 2 levels with bow, and I increase that to 9 base OCV and 6 levels with bow, what is the visual difference?  I missed a couple of times in my first few adventures?  Now I make a few more trick shots than I did before?  How does an observer know the difference?

 

 

The simplest explanation is that people in the game universe can't see my dice rolls, and they can't see my character sheet.

[massey]

I also wonder who your players are, saving up enough points to buy 6 combat skill levels at once.  The only time I've ever had a large amount of XP saved up, I was playing a very efficient build.  I had the most powerful character in the game, and he was a good 75 points cheaper than everyone else.  So I just hung on to the rest of the points until I could figure out what to do with them.  But in 20 years of Champions gaming, that's happened once.

[bigbywolfe]

Whether done immediately or after a wait, I have never seen a player doing anything other than greedily spending their experience. Just like in everyone else's games.

How the hell does a player "greedily" spend XP? Maybe if you think every player in every game ever is being greedy they are really just playing the game normally and the problem is with you putting some weird value judgement on participating in a normal part of the game...

[Doc Democracy]

I feel sorry for TheDarkness. I think, and that is as far as it goes, I think that what he was hoping for was a discussion of how folk try to make the spending of experience more relevant to the ongoing storylines in the campaign and how far their recent actions should colour that expenditure.

 

Instead there has been a bit of a dogpile telling him how much of a fascist GM he is. I am certain that is not the intention of the commentary but has noone tried to integrate spending with gameplay??

 

Doc

[Greywind]

"When did you become an expert on nuclear astrophysics?"

 

"Last night."

[massey]

I feel sorry for TheDarkness. I think, and that is as far as it goes, I think that what he was hoping for was a discussion of how folk try to make the spending of experience more relevant to the ongoing storylines in the campaign and how far their recent actions should colour that expenditure.

 

Instead there has been a bit of a dogpile telling him how much of a fascist GM he is. I am certain that is not the intention of the commentary but has noone tried to integrate spending with gameplay??

 

Doc

 

Well, incorporating an XP expenditure into your "character narrative" or whatever you want to call it, is perfectly fine.  Trying to enforce that is difficult, because it becomes a game of "guess what number I'm thinking of"  At that point, your players have to explain things to you in a way that makes you happy, so their character fits your vision of what their character should be.  TheDarkness uses a lot of pretty extreme examples, of people spending 10, or 20, or more character points in one go.  I doubt that's too much of a problem for his group.  It's more an example of his fear of what would happen without GM restrictions.  I seriously doubt people have enough XP saved up to buy 5 combat skill levels at once, unless maybe they're 2 point levels.  I don't see anyone saving up 25 or 30 points at once, and then doing that multiple times throughout the game.  Not enough to make "drastic re-imaginings of the character" multiple times in one campaign.

[BoloOfEarth]

I feel sorry for TheDarkness. I think, and that is as far as it goes, I think that what he was hoping for was a discussion of how folk try to make the spending of experience more relevant to the ongoing storylines in the campaign and how far their recent actions should colour that expenditure.

 

Instead there has been a bit of a dogpile telling him how much of a fascist GM he is. I am certain that is not the intention of the commentary but has noone tried to integrate spending with gameplay??

 

Doc

 

It was not my intention to denigrate his manner of GMing XP, and if it came across that way I apologize for any misunderstanding.  I was just giving my experience (pun intended) in the matter. 

 

To be honest, there have been a few occasions where a player in my games wanted to spend XP on something that didn't make much sense in how his PC would acquire the skill or ability.  (e.g. a PC wanted to become an overnight expert in subspace navigation to pilot a spaceship they had just stolen the week before from invading aliens).  At times like that, I simply gave the "evil GM smile" (patent pending) and said, "So you're going to learn this by trial and error, right?  Push some random buttons and see what happens?"  (rub hands together gleefully)  "Okay, let's get started!" 

 

For some strange reason they usually changed their minds.

[BoloOfEarth]

I don't see anyone saving up 25 or 30 points at once, and then doing that multiple times throughout the game.  Not enough to make "drastic re-imaginings of the character" multiple times in one campaign.

 

Although I have seen it happen at singular occasions during a campaign.  In my first Champions campaign (where I created and played Bolo), I did exactly that.  My GM called it a "nuclear accident".  I had saved up 50 XP (and that GM wasn't overly generous with XP, so that took a while) and then told him I wanted to do a major rewrite of the character.  He was running a major campaign arc involving two warring alien factions using Earth as a battleground, and he incorporated my character's "nuclear accident" into the overall plot.  Bolo was kidnapped by Firewing and experimented upon by a Malvan scientist, so Bolo's electricity powers were enhanced and altered beyond recognition.  Even drew up a new costume to go with the new powers.

[death tribble]

I have saved up over 100 XPs for characters on the understandings with the GMs that there would be a 'radiation accident' and that the character would be changed as a result. Doing that you can then increase STR, DEX, CON, BODY, SPD and PRE usually as well as making radical changes to power sets i.e. Entangle affects desolid. But you have to keep things in proportion. The Energy projector went from DEX 20 to 33, STR 10 to 20 but this was as a result of background on the charact6er and what he was doing between missions.

 

But TheDarkness has a point with XP expenditure. You can't just add the points in overnight. 'Can't hit you ? Fine I'm buying enough CSLs until I can.'

On the other hand if you go to the GM and say you are practicing continually and add in the levels one at a time over a period then there should be no trouble unless the levels become excessive.

 

However the GM and the player can have vastly differing opinions on what the character conception can be and what damage resistance can mean. For example the GM thought it would be a good idea if the character took a knife to the eye and then would look Nick Fury like because the eye did not have the same protection as the rest of the body. The player on the other hand thought said idea was completely out of line and refused to play if such an idea was carried through.

 

The old rule was XP expenditure had to be agreed with the GM and had to be related to what the character was doing. So City Knowledges could increase through patrolling, martial arts could be learned through exposure to a teacher and continued training etc

[BoloOfEarth]

On a related note, I have a few players who simply don't spend XP except once in a blue moon.  The heroes get 2-3 XP every game session but some players don't think to spend them until they've accumulated 20-30 points.  It's not that they're saving them up for a big bump up in power / skill.  They just don't get around to doing anything with the XP, generally until it becomes apparent in game play that the bad guys are overpowering them.  (Note that I give villains XP at roughly the same rate as the heroes, unless the villain in question has been locked away for a while, so in theory fights should be fairly balanced.) 

 

In general, I hand-wave retcon such XP expenditures as the characters actually learned skills / created powers over time, but they don't actually have the opportunity to use them (or don't choose to use them) until later.  Heck, a few of the players forget to use powers or skills their characters have had from the start that would be perfect for a given situation ("Gee, if only one of you was skilled in Forgery, you could figure out if this woman's identity is legit..."  "Oh, wait, that's right, I have Forgery skill, don't I?").  So it's not a stretch for one of them to not use a skill or power they recently acquired.

 

A great example of "sudden XP use" happened last month.  The heroes of Just Cause were handed their first real defeat at the hands of villains who fancied themselves reincarnated Greek gods.  With most of the team unconscious, Zeus had the remaining two heroes surrender (with the understanding that the villains would then all leave without the heroes attacking or pursuing them).  The next week, the news headline read "Just Cause Balks, New Gods Walk."  And three players suddenly wanted to spend chunks of XP.

 

In retrospect, I should have played the theme to Rocky and told the players to visualize a training montage.  It would have been appropriate.

[Greywind]

If the villains have been locked away for a while, it's a good rationale for buying knowledge skills, criminal useful skills and the like.

[BoloOfEarth]

If the villains have been locked away for a while, it's a good rationale for buying knowledge skills, criminal useful skills and the like.

 

Agreed.  However, I only award the incarcerated villains 1/2 the XP that the heroes earned during that time.  That's the price they pay for getting locked away. 

 

I figure that takes a bit of the bite out of the superhero trope of villains not being permanently incarcerated.