Karma, Rewards /Consequences Do you use it? If so, what is good, and if not what is bad?

[1QD]

So I have introduced Karma as an optional rule in my system. It is often used as a reward system, and even other players can suggest karma if the occasion calls for it. I have brought forth the idea to other communities who abhorred the idea, claim there will be excessive favouritism, over reach and control. This has not been the case. In the twenty six years I have been using it I can count the number of times I have awarded a negative Karma ability on 1 hand. In counter I have awarded over 300 Karma abilities.

My point for using karma is for awarding good behaviour such as , saving character lives, sacrificing loot to help further the story, and player who put in a lot of effort. Negative Karma is used to deter argumentative players, or ones that disrupt gameplay. ( As mentioned I game with adults , so this is extremely rare.) It is also awarded for in game things such as, killing innocents, damaging the party with aoes or worse yet killing them. Use of karma becomes universally understood very quickly within a campaign. While I can understand that in the hands of some it could be abused, but to clarify here I am taking a well balance incentive type of position, not a toxic heavy handed one.

 

[dragoner]

Not as such, playing Paranoia we had a another player start being obstreperous towards the GM and we all told them to knock it off. As GM I have rewarded player characters with luck points, do a re-roll or something of their choosing, usually for good role-playing. Try to never do stuff negative, doesn't really work.

 

[Deset Gled]

Okay, so it's a meta currency. Nothing particularly unique about that. Some systems have it, some don't.

Awarding negative meta currency to punish bad gaming behavior is counterproductive on multiple fronts, though. It's generally not going to make the situation better, it's just going to make the problem player upset and more likely to act out. It rewards bad behavior with negative attention. Using the same currency that you use to reward role-playing is literally training bad players to believe it's okay to behave badly for awhile as long as they make up for it later. And using the same currency to enforce in game alignment means bad real-life behavior can be treated like an in-game resource.

If you have problem players, address them directly like an adult. Don't make a game out of it.

 

[TheHand]

The only time I ever gamed with someone that used “negative karma” in his games was back in the early 90s. He called them “dummy points” and used them to punish player actions. He had some kind of reward point system too, which he generally only handed out to his 3 closest friends or to people that bought him beer and food. I abandoned ship right away from that guy, but he ran his games at a local comic shop so he always seemed to have a revolving door of players at the ready.

It taught me the lesson to never run games like that and to never use in game meta-currency to punish players (or to reward real world bribes).

 

[Jahydin]

I really like that idea of Karma/Honor because I like to award bravery. Everything to heavy-handed Hackmaster where high Honor will get you discounts when purchasing items and bonuses in combat because your opponent can sense your importance; to the more subtle ACKS and Dragonslayer, where dying bravely lets you reroll another character with a portion of your dead PC's XP.

 

[MGibster]

My point for using karma is for awarding good behaviour such as , saving character lives, sacrificing loot to help further the story, and player who put in a lot of effort. Negative Karma is used to deter argumentative players, or ones that disrupt gameplay.

TSR's Marvel Superheroes had a Karma system designed to encourage player characters to engage in silver age super heroics like saving lives, rescuing people, going out of their way to help someone, etc., etc. I don't remember the particulars, but I think deliberating killing someone resulted in a loss of all Karma. There was probably some Karma loss for unheroic behavior as well.

Vampire 5E doesn't have a Karma system, but it does have tenants. A tenant is a rule that if violated causes a character to gain a Stain. Collect enough Stains and you risk lowering your Humanity. Never betray a member of the coterie or never feed on children are examples of tenants. Each player decides what their character's tenants are and as a group they decide on what the campaigns tenants are. Any violation of the campaign's tenants results in a stain.

I think it's a great idea to mechanically encourage the type of game play everyone wants to enjoy.

 

[GMMichael]

My point for using karma is for awarding good behaviour such as , saving character lives, sacrificing loot to help further the story, and player who put in a lot of effort. Negative Karma is used to deter argumentative players, or ones that disrupt gameplay. ( As mentioned I game with adults , so this is extremely rare.) It is also awarded for in game things such as, killing innocents, damaging the party with aoes or worse yet killing them.

Players like rewards. That's cool. If they're rewarded by the GM, and not a deity-NPC, I would expect them to be for metagame stuff or sort of ideologically neutral things. So: putting in effort, focusing on backstory, adding helpful details. I don't want the GM rewarding only a certain type of do-gooder, especially if my character doesn't conform to that type.

Don't reward the knucklehead for killing "evil" creatures, and then ignore my thief's efforts to poison an "innocent" merchant who sells magical leafblowers. If the God of False Dichotomies is awarding the karma, then sure, I guess it makes sense.

 

[payn]

My issue with rewarding good behavior (and/or punishing "bad" behavior) is it leads folks away from organic play and into meta decisions. Does it really interest them or are they looking for a karma cookie? I want my players to come to their decisions out of interest in the setting and exploring the character naturally.

Broadly speaking, this is also why I dont use XP. Is it a bad mechanic? I think thats in the eye of the beholder, but Id never use a system with it myself.

 

[1QD]

My issue with rewarding good behavior (and/or punishing "bad" behavior) is it leads folks away from organic play and into meta decisions. Does it really interest them or are they looking for a karma cookie? I want my players to come to their decisions out of interest in the setting and exploring the character naturally.

I can understand why you might feel that way but in this case I would say, at least within my own group, Karma is not treated like that. Instead if you for example save another characters life, ( which you can do if you crit succeed an avoid for example) or by direct action and roleplaying you would get rewarded. You are not really going to find that players put one another in harms way just so they can save them for the karma. Likewise, if you were to kill an unarmed man, this warrants - karma for a good character.

I generally do not reward evil behaviour but if you are playing evil, then the scale slides a bit. We expect evil characters to do evil things, but out n out psycho evil is generally still rewarded with -Karma. I also award negative karma for the harm of other players, and of course death. I think it is still fair to say not killing each other is a reasonable expectation.

I do not feel that karma takes anything away from the genuine express of my players. Could it be a danger? Yes if placed within the wrong hands, which is why the mechanic is optional, But it has been my experience thus far that the karma system is both fair, genuine and rewarding.

Lastly, my players tend towards neutral and good, and in fact i have played more evil characters than them. So -karma is exceedingly rare. And of course, if Karma does not fit your style. It is optional, as many rules in my game are. I have designed my system to be somewhat modular in nature. If you feel a mechanic takes too much time, or doesn't feel right for your style, awesome, most likely it is optional.