Confirm or Deny: D&D4e would be going strong had it not been titled D&D

[pemerton]

Savage GMs are highly encouraged directly in the rules to reward "good" or "interesting" play with bennies---playing against type, using a less-than-optimized skill because the fiction/scene calls for it, interjecting yourself into a conversation, taking a major risk for a team member.

I'd put this part-way between 4e and Burning Wheel. In 4e the incentives are purely "soft" - trying to make sure the fiction goes the way the player wants it to go. In BW the incentives are about as hard as an RPG gets - mechanical advancement of the PC. Earning GM-adjudicated fate points seems harder than pure softness but softer than pure hardness.

EDIT to add:

The reason I'm interested in this is because I often see posts where GMs are complaining that their players won't take risks with their PCs, or complain or push back when they can't bring their best bonuses to bear. Often the response to such posts is to blame "munchkin" or "powergaming" players. Whereas I think it's much more helpful to look at the incentive structure and opportunities that a given system gives rise to.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I'd put this part-way between 4e and Burning Wheel. In 4e the incentives are purely "soft" - trying to make sure the fiction goes the way the player wants it to go. In BW the incentives are about as hard as an RPG gets - mechanical advancement of the PC. Earning GM-adjudicated fate points seems harder than pure softness but softer than pure hardness.

Savage Worlds Bennies basically work this way on the distribution end. The GM rewards players for roleplaying their character. If he or she is consistent about it, and players are responsive to getting bennies, it can shape what kinds of actions the players take and whether they are likely to make suboptimal choices (because to get the bennies you need to be true to your character).

The downside I've seen of bennies is some players are irked by how they are distributed. The distribution of bennies by the GM as a reward for good RP never really bothered me but I had one player in my group who couldn't stand that part of the system.

 

[Stacie GmrGrl]

Savage Worlds Bennies basically work this way on the distribution end. The GM rewards players for roleplaying their character. If he or she is consistent about it, and players are responsive to getting bennies, it can shape what kinds of actions the players take and whether they are likely to make suboptimal choices (because to get the bennies you need to be true to your character).

The downside I've seen of bennies is some players are irked by how they are distributed. The distribution of bennies by the GM as a reward for good RP never really bothered me but I had one player in my group who couldn't stand that part of the system.

It's the same problem in D&D 5e with the Inspiration mechanism as well... the problem of these game mechanisms is that they are entirely up to GM fiat as to when to hand them out and Players never know when, or truly even IF they will get them and the rules don't give Players specific rules for when or how to get them. It's all up to the GM to decide when and that puts a lot of "power" in the hands of the GM to dictate how the game will be.

This is where Fate games and Cortex Plus games do it better, especially Cortex Plus because it literally gives the ability to gain more Plot Points/Fate Points in the hands of the players and not the GM. In Cortex Plus games the player can choose to roll their Distinctions at a lower die rate to gain a Plot Point when they make their dice rolls or they can roll them at a higher rate of possible success but not gain that Plot Point. Fate games give this option to the GM to use their Aspects in a negative way and basically tell the GM that they are doing this and gain the Fate point and it would be a bad GM to not allow this to happen.

 

[Bedrockgames]

It's the same problem in D&D 5e with the Inspiration mechanism as well... the problem of these game mechanisms is that they are entirely up to GM fiat as to when to hand them out and Players never know when, or truly even IF they will get them and the rules don't give Players specific rules for when or how to get them. It's all up to the GM to decide when and that puts a lot of "power" in the hands of the GM to dictate how the game will be.

This is where Fate games and Cortex Plus games do it better, especially Cortex Plus because it literally gives the ability to gain more Plot Points/Fate Points in the hands of the players and not the GM. In Cortex Plus games the player can choose to roll their Distinctions at a lower die rate to gain a Plot Point when they make their dice rolls or they can roll them at a higher rate of possible success but not gain that Plot Point. Fate games give this option to the GM to use their Aspects in a negative way and basically tell the GM that they are doing this and gain the Fate point and it would be a bad GM to not allow this to happen.

this was one of the two big issues the player I knew had with Bennies. I think it partly comes down to personality and how comfortable you are with the GM divvying out that kind of thing. His objection was that no GM would be 100% fair and ultimately the players who were the most vocal and social would get the bennies. I wasn't as concerned about this complaint, but I could understand where he was coming from.

His other objection, and one that i don't think Fate or Cortex would satisfy based on your description, was he wasn't into out of character metagame mechanics like that (a sensibility I share, but in the case of bennies can overlook because I like Savage Worlds overall).

I haven't played Fate or Cortex though, so I can't really comment on those particular systems.

 

[Zhaleskra]

I stopped paying attention to this topic for quite a few pages. This seems like a good place to mention, that the Planescape setting, as of The Planewalker's Handbook, Belief Points were both introduced and given clear cut rules. Earning the points, setting difficulty of defending the beliefs, and spending the belief points your character earned. Other systems have clear cut rules on their "Ass Saver Points" too. Usually including "cannot negate what an ASP was just used to do".

 

[Bedrockgames]

I stopped paying attention to this topic for quite a few pages. This seems like a good place to mention, that the Planescape setting, as of The Planewalker's Handbook, Belief Points were both introduced and given clear cut rules. Earning the points, setting difficulty of defending the beliefs, and spending the belief points your character earned. Other systems have clear cut rules on their "Ass Saver Points" too. Usually including "cannot negate what an ASP was just used to do".

There were some interesting games out at that time that did things people forget about.

 

[Zhaleskra]

Likely because people did not pick up those settings and systems and then ran on assumptions.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Likely because people did not pick up those settings and systems and then ran on assumptions.

I think the passage of time is another factor. I played a ton of different RPGs in the 90s, but it has been so long that for many of them, my memory is quite fuzzy.

 

[Manbearcat]

It's the same problem in D&D 5e with the Inspiration mechanism as well... the problem of these game mechanisms is that they are entirely up to GM fiat as to when to hand them out and Players never know when, or truly even IF they will get them and the rules don't give Players specific rules for when or how to get them. It's all up to the GM to decide when and that puts a lot of "power" in the hands of the GM to dictate how the game will be.

This is where Fate games and Cortex Plus games do it better, especially Cortex Plus because it literally gives the ability to gain more Plot Points/Fate Points in the hands of the players and not the GM. In Cortex Plus games the player can choose to roll their Distinctions at a lower die rate to gain a Plot Point when they make their dice rolls or they can roll them at a higher rate of possible success but not gain that Plot Point. Fate games give this option to the GM to use their Aspects in a negative way and basically tell the GM that they are doing this and gain the Fate point and it would be a bad GM to not allow this to happen.

Good post and I'm in agreement of your juxtaposition of the play procedures surrounding SW Bennies and 5e Inspiration versus Fate and C+. Dogs is similar in play procedure and feedback to Fate and C+ in that escalating to guns is always going to include a d4 and players are in charge of establishing their dice for Background (attributes), Traits, Relationship, and Belongings. Accordingly, they're mostly (not quite wholly as the GM is in charge of the initial fictional positioning of a scene and, as always, interprets the dice/prior fictional positioning in order to properly evolve it) in charge of their potential complications (rolling low on your dice pool and being forced to take the blow, escalate, or concede), its respective impact on the immediate conflict, and then their post-conflict Fallout (xp and damage in Dogs...lower value dice yielding a 1 is less risk - the die value corresponds to damage - but you still garner the system's derivative of "xp").

And Dogs is all about stakes and escalation. Your brother's kid is spending time at a speak-easy brothel that a stranger has just secretly opened in town (in direct violation of The Faith)? Your brother is about to take the law into his own hands and commit murder in cold blood by empting both barrels of his shot gun into the flesh-broker. Lots of sin and wrongdoing going on here and it is about to explosively get worse. Your God's Watchdog assigned to tend to the flock, root out evil, and mete out justice. What do you do?