Non-combat rewards

[The_Universe]

While out walking the dog this evening, I started to think about old console-based first-person-shooters, in particular, one of the games (I can't remember which) that gave out rewards at the end of a multiplayer game for the player that got the most of a certain kind of kill, the player that died the most times, etc.

As it often does while I am out walking the dog, my mind wandered, and I began to wonder if I might be able to implement a similar system for D&D, in order to encourage certain player behaviors/activities in a formal, out-in-the-open sort of way.

In my case, I'd like to encourage more in-character dialogue in session. Thus, I began to wonder if I could establish a reward, perhaps on the order of 10% of the total XP required to go from a PC's current level to the next, for either the "most entertaining" or even just "most" in-character dialogue. For the purpose of this exercise, we'll call this particular reward the "Ham it up!" Award.

The question then becomes: is this a good idea? What are the dangers of attempting to implement such a policy? Are there any?

Secondarily, it occurs to me that, if I do implement this idea, I'll want other awards, as well. Perhaps a reward for combat junkies for "the most kills," or something - much like the FPS games I'm basing my idea on.

What other awards should I consider, if it's worth considering them at all?

 

[I'm A Banana]

It's not a bad idea, and has been with D&D for a long time in the form of bonus XP.

The only slight difficulty you may have is people trying to get these awards for subjective things, and you may end up rewarding some play styles too heavily (not every player will be able to compete for the Ham It Up award; not every player will compete for the Most Killed award, either).

But that can be avoided if you come up with a broad enough selection of awards. Bonus XP is more for encouraging things they already do a little bit -- if you've got a bit of an actor, encourage him to do it more. If you've got a combataholic, you can encourage it more.

One thing I kind of liked about the FPS rewards is that they reward things that ALL the players tend to try and do. You could give out awards for Most 20's Rolled, or for Most 1's Rolled; you could give out awards for those who bring snacks or soda, or to the guy whose house you play in. You could give it to the person who can remember the plot to this point, or to someone who avoided an encounter in a clever way...

It's a good idea.

 

[Chimera]

Like KM said, those kind of rewards have been around a long time. The problem is generally that they always end up going to the same people. I used to try it a lot, in order to attempt to "draw out" certain people and get them to RP more, but it failed miserably. People who don't RP aren't going to RP for an extra cookie (read: XP).

IMC, I tend to put down XP awards for certain actions and events.

For example, two sessions ago I had 3 different XP awards listed for talking to a Kobold Sorcerer. Unfortunately, though it should have been obvious that he wanted to talk; as he walked up ALONE after the party had killed over 20 of his people, then initiated a conversation; my players were more interested in attacking him. Sorry boys, NO XP. And you seriously missed out on important information too!

XP for prisoners released from the Kobolds. For talking to (not just ignoring) certain people. For destroying things they should destroy. For returning an object they should return rather than simply sell. (That one was roughly 100gp for selling, or 2,000 xp to the group for returning it.) For passing on relevant bits of information.

For completing missions, goals and whole adventure plots.

 

[FireLance]

While I think it's a good idea, the fundamental question I would ask is: why give the reward in the form of XP?

XP is nice, but a player who loves to "ham it up" might appreciate something like a "Don't I know you?" card, which can be played during an encounter with a generic NPC (one of the BBEG's guards, for example, or a minor henchman) to turn it from a combat into something that the player can overcome using his skill at hamming it up.

Someone who has tuned his character to kill stuff might prefer a "Success breeds confidence" card which could be played during a fight to immediately negate the effects of a failed save against a fear effect (or any other effect that might take him out of a fight).

 

[The_lurkeR]

While I think it's a good idea, the fundamental question I would ask is: why give the reward in the form of XP?

XP is nice, but a player who loves to "ham it up" might appreciate something like a "Don't I know you?" card, which can be played during an encounter with a generic NPC (one of the BBEG's guards, for example, or a minor henchman) to turn it from a combat into something that the player can overcome using his skill at hamming it up.

Someone who has tuned his character to kill stuff might prefer a "Success breeds confidence" card which could be played during a fight to immediately negate the effects of a failed save against a fear effect (or any other effect that might take him out of a fight).

Excellent idea!
Do you have a list of ones you use in your campaign you could share?

 

[FireLance]

Excellent idea!
Do you have a list of ones you use in your campaign you could share?

Thanks for the compliment, but I don't use them in my campaign. It was just an idea sparked off by the The_Universe's post.

 

[Thanee]

TORG has cards like this. They are actually incorporated in the system and pretty fun.


As to the original post... problems might arise when certain players always get the rewards, because they, well, always outshine the others in certain areas, simply because they are better at it (as players, not their characters). That might lead to certain negative feelings, which should not be encouraged. This depends on your players and cannot be generalized, though.

I generally dislike giving out bonuses for *player skill or talent*, and tend to only reward what the character does on a character level.

I do give generous rewards for non-combat events, though.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Vrecknidj]

Many of the published products (I'm currently thinking of Red Hand of Doom) have little sidebars and hints to the DM that certain kinds of accomplishments should grant the PCs the xp of an encounter of a certain CR. This isn't a bad way to go. You can make the delivery of such xp individualistic, but you don't have to.

I mean, unless you've got some really grumpy players, it's not unreasonable to give the party xp for talking their way out of a situation, or for finding a unique solution to a problem, even if it was almost entirely the actions of one character.

After all, there may be some player at the table who doesn't do a lot of role-playing, doesn't think up some of the creative solutions, but whose character almost single-handedly saves the party by beating the BBEG. We give group experience even if everyone but the paladin and barbarian get paralyzed. We should give group experience even if everyone but the two best role-players get tongue-tied.

Dave

 

[Shadowslayer]

The downside with these kinds of rewards is that they're arbitrary. Kill 5 orcs, you get X number of XP. Even if you add an "X amount of XP for sneaking past the guards", its still an award the player either gets, or he doesn't.

I personally dislike anything that makes me, as the DM, look like a figure skating judge. (holding up a big card that says 8.5) That's, to me, like only rewarding players who's style is in sync with your own. Thats kind of cheesy.

ANd, if the player's style is all in sync with yours, then such rewards wouldn't be necessary.

DOn't know what else to tell you. I quit trying to force some of my guys to dialogue. The players that'll dialogue will do it whether or not there's XP on the line, and the players that don't will resent the rule.

My own rule is :I'm the judge, they're the players...so I'll worry about rules and metagame, and he players can play the way they want. Everyone's happy.

 

[Umbran]

The question then becomes: is this a good idea? What are the dangers of attempting to implement such a policy? Are there any?

There are dangers of any policy (including the standard ones set in the DMG).

I would expect that you're setting yourself up to always give the award to one or two players who are naturally talky, and in the process of filling the air to get the reward, they'll tend to drown out the more quiet players. You might end up increasing the amount of talk without increasing the amount of interaction.

In the standard rules, combat earns awards, but they are generally given out to everyone who participated or took risks - the players are rewarded for cooperating. This sort of award has the players competing against each other, and that may not be what you want.

Rather than making your players compete against each other, it might be better to make them compete against a set standard. Decide how much inter-character chatting you want, and anyone who meets that minimum gets an award.