|
I've been browsing the Systems Failure rules a lot lately in order to prepare for a convention module I'm writing and running.
Although experience points don't necessarily matter in a con game, I found I wanted to revise the existing experience point award
guidelines; they seemed to place emphasis on the wrong areas. If the system is meant to reward roleplaying, why is there only a
fifty-point bonus for playing in character? Why is there a focus on self-sacrifice and saving lives when some character alignments are
concerned with self-gratification and the perceived worthlessness of the lives of others?
I've created a revised experience point guide based on more directly rewarding those who make an extra effort to get into the
roleplaying experience. I hope Palladium gamers find it useful.
The experience level system seems based on the assumption that characters are always learning; when the character's experience level
goes up due to accumulation of experience points, every single skill increases. Whenever a character accomplishes a feat or uses a
skill, he or she is learning: either some new way of using a skill or refining and polishing an existing technique.
The standard Palladium system sets awards for "killing and subduing menaces", which I've incorporated into the
"Resolving situation" awards. I'm of the belief that, all else being equal, a low-level amateur PC should receive similar XP
for defeating a high-level antagonist or menace as a PC with equivalent experience to that menace would. Both PCs are likely using their
skills in similar ways to defeat the menace; the difference is that the lower level PC is learning new things about his skills, and the
higher level PC is polishing these techniques as he's already learned them (the Game Master may wish to knock fifty to one hundred XP
off the higher character's award to reflect this). If this seems wrong, keep in mind that the higher skill level of the experienced PC
is already taken into account in that it takes many more experience points for a high-level PC to increase to the next level than a
low-level PC.
One assumption that the standard Palladium experience system makes is that most characters are going to be heroic do-gooders; the
highest experience points are awarded for actions of self-sacrifice, with bonuses for avoiding violence. This is admirable: it helps
promote positive behaviour and sets a moral tone for roleplaying. However, players may make characters who don't take the moral high
ground or who aren't willing to sacrifice themselves; the nature of their characters mean they hold their own life in too high regard to
do so (anarchist, miscreant and diabolic alignments come to mind). It seems unfair to them to penalise them for acting in character.
Rather than providing experience for specific actions taken to resolve a situation (i.e. throwing yourself before a bullet, staying
behind to make sure the bomb goes off), I've geared the experience point awards to reflect the gaming method used. Resolving a situation
primarily through use of the game mechanics (simply finding a skill or skills that apply to the situation, factoring in modifiers and
then rolling) gets the lowest award; it takes little imagination and reduces what could be the climax to a dramatic situation into dice
rolling. Planning and ingenuity get quite a high award, as they involve thinking about the situation, inventing a solution and applying
it. Roleplaying gets the highest award, of course; the XP award includes any dice-rolling or planning done, but primarily rewards an
in-character performance that the player tried to resolve the situation with.
| Player Action |
XP Award |
| |
Standard |
Critical Situation * |
| Plays in session |
50 |
|
| Contributes to group's enjoyment of game |
100 |
|
| Remains in character occasionally during session |
75 |
|
| Remains in character through half to two thirds of session |
150 |
|
| Remains in character through most or all of session |
300 |
|
| Tries something new (within character) |
250 |
|
| Deductive reasoning and/or insight |
100-200 |
|
| Resolution of a situation primarily through skill rolls |
100-150 |
200-300 |
| Resolution of a situation primarily through application of a coherent plan |
200-500 |
400-700 |
| Resolution of a situation primarily through roleplaying |
300-700 |
600-1000 |
| Resolution of a situation through teamwork ** |
200-400 |
300-600 |
| Failed attempt to resolve a situation primarily through application of a coherent plan |
100-200 |
300-400 |
| Failed attempt to resolve a situation primarily through roleplaying |
150-250 |
300-500 |
| Accomplishes in-character goal (not applicable if done purely through skill rolls) |
300-500 |
|
* A "Critical Situation" is a point of great risk in the game session; the characters' lives may all be at serious risk, or
their mission that is close to completion is hinging on a particular event or action. Typically, this is the climax to the session. PCs
get more experience for resolving these situations than for other events in the session. NOTE: not every session has a
critical situation; althoug players and the GM may wish to discuss the events in the session, the GM's word, as always, is final.
** Teamwork usually involves the group following the lead of a particular player and ensuring his or her plan or actions to resolve
the situation come through. The players in the team should receive a full teamwork award with a bonus based on how they resolved the
situation (skill rolls, coherent plan or roleplaying), whereas the "leader(s)" in that particular situation should receive a
full Resolution award based on how they resolved the situation (skill rolls, coherent plan or roleplaying) in addition to a bonus
teamwork award.
Based on the above system, I believe the typical gaming effort - turning up, playing somewhat in character, working with the other
players and the GM to make the gaming experience enjoyable - should earn 1,100 to 1,300 XP per game. This means a starting PC is likely
to increase to second level after two adventures; considering the action content of the average adventure, a person is likely to learn
his skills very quickly.
It also means a gaming group who play extremely regularly (say, at least once a week) will still need three-fifths of a year of
steady gaming (thirty to thirty-five sessions) to get Level 9 characters to Level 10.
Greater reward should, of course, be given on those rare occasions when a player manages to get thoroughly into character and boosts
the entire group's enjoyment of the game. These herculean efforts don't happen often; when they do, the upper end of the
"Resolution of a situation primarily through roleplaying" scale should be awarded.
A player group comprised of an Exterminator, a Freebooter, a Grease Monkey and a NORAD Psychic (all brand new PCs with no XPs) has
just completed a session and the GM is determining the XP awards.
The group eliminated a small swarm of Bugs early on (mainly through standard combat) and talked their way into the good graces of a
bunker-town (thanks to the Freebooter's player roleplaying out the haggling over a deal and a card game). The Exterminator wound up with
a crush on the town mayor's daughter (more roleplaying) and the players valiantly fought off a Bug siege (with the Grease Monkey coming
up with some innovative traps and the entire team working to get them assembled and ready).
The siege was a ruse, however; a Bug stealth force sneaked into town under the cover of the fighting and whisked the non-combatants -
including the mayor's daughter - away. The NORAD Psychic was able to track the Bugs using Sense Evil (skill roll/power use) and the team
followed the Bugs stealthily back to their hideout, where they discovered a Killer Bee protecting a Stink Bug that was implanting the
appropriated townsfolk with Silkworm Grubs.
The Grease Monkey and the Freebooter volunteered to lead the Killer Bee away whilst the Psychic and Exterminator took care of the
landlocked bugs (much quick thinking on both parts as the Exterminator and Psychic were outnumbered and the Freebooter and Grease Monkey
managed to cripple and defeat the airborne Killer Bee with a jury-rigged net trap). The group discovered the mayor's daughter had gone
catatonic from seeing her friends implanted; with some very sensitive roleplaying, the Exterminator, with the aid of the NORAD Psychic,
brought her out of it.
The GM gives out 50 XP to each player, plus 150 XP to the Freebooter, Grease Monkey and NORAD Psychic for consistent in roleplaying
and 250 XP to the Exterminator for almost never lapsing in roleplaying. Each player also gets 50 XP for defeating the first Bug
Swarm.
The Freebooter gets 350 XP for roleplaying out haggling his way into the good graces of the town, two teamwork awards of 200 points
each for assisting the Grease Monkey in defending the town and nailing the Killer Bee, plus half-awards of 100 points each for resolving
those situations with a plan.
The Exterminator gets 500 points for roleplaying bringing the mayor's daughter out of her catatonia, plus a half-teamwork bonus of
150 points for working with the NORAD Psychic to do so. He also gets a teamwork award of 200 points for assisting the Grease Monkey in
defending the town plus a half-award of 100 points each for resolving that situation with a plan. He also gains 50 points for
eliminating the last group of Bugs in rolled combat.
The Grease Monkey gets two awards of 200 points each for coming up with plans to defend the town and nail the Killer Bee, plus two
half-teamwork awards of 100 points each for working with the Freebooter to do so.
The NORAD Psychic gets 50 XP for tracking the Bugs, 50 XP for eliminating them at the end, a half-bonus of 250 points for roleplaying
bringing the mayor's daughter out of her catatonia, plus a teamwork bonus of 300 points for helping the Exterminator to do so.
Totals:
Exterminator: 1250 XP
Freebooter: 1200 XP
Grease Monkey: 850 XP
NORAD Psychic: 900 XP
As you can see, the awards for roleplaying were the highest. Only half the group got less than half the XP needed to increase from
Level 1 to Level 2, and then only by a matter of 100-150 points. The awards I assigned were at the lower end of the spectrum for each
category; another GM might have given out more toward the middle (especially considering the risk two first-level characters faced in
going against a Killer Bee), giving the characters a better chance of jumping to second level after the next session.
|