Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="N'raac" data-source="post: 6686464" data-attributes="member: 6681948">I agree we are largely on the same page.  That was not my intent, so I apologize for any perceived slight.  My comments were more directed at Bluff also having defined game effects, but Bluff does have room for tactical bonuses, as a skill rather than as a bonus in its own right.Typically, the character is still around (as there is rarely a convenient opportunity for the character to drop out, and when there is, a convenient opportunity for him to drop back in isn't guaranteed).  Our group is presently small enough that someone being unavailable often means we postpone the next game anyway, but we'd typically just carry on - full xp for the missing player's character.  It's not like players are deliberately missing sessions, and if they need an xp reason to attend, they likely are not long for the game anyway.Not dissimilar, I think, from your group's removal of the current GM's character, who still gets full xp and loot for the period the character was absent.To me, "reward" connotes some perception of "winning" by obtaining the rewards, so that suggests some form of competition.  I find it an issue more from the perspective of keeping the characters comparable in power, and thus relevance to the game.  Sure.  However, it seems like the intent of a bonus is to reward superior play.  If the result is falling behind, that reward does not actually materialize.  Similarly, it seems like charging XP for certain spells or magic items is intended to prevent their overuse, due to a perceived balance issue.  If the result is that the character gains xp faster than his teammates due to the xp cost, then it's not serving its mechanical purpose.The scene could be played for comic relief.  My point was twofold.  First, if an RP reward is suitable for the Bardic Recitation, it seems suitable for the well role played Bluff as well.  Of course, the Bluff is also more conducive to an in-game bonus to the roll as Bardic Recitation has no success/failure to be adjudicated.  The bigger point, to me, is that an eloquent speech from the social outcast is not good role playing, and should not be rewarded.  I think we're on the same page there - Social Outcast rolls with his own skills, and gets no special reward for player eloquence.  He could get a bonus for in-game tactics such as the signet ring or knowing the "orcs to the south" rumours, but it's the same bonus the Face could get, so better to suggest it to the other character if the goal is for the group to succeed.  I think there is both what we want to encourage and what we need to encourage.  Our table has plenty of good role playing, for which the reward is largely intrinsic, outside peer recognition.  Ultimately, the reward must translate into "more fun", whatever it is, or it's not a reward at all.  I don't find a need to encourage a fun game with in-game benefits, but I don't see any great harm in it either.  Ultimately, the only question is whether the group is having fun.  Ultimately, I don't think xp bonuses are going to bring a min/maxing munchkin around to better role playing.  It will largely reward what the RP players were already doing anyway, and I suspect the peer recognition is more a positive reinforcement than an xp bonus is.  Peer recognition likely also comes from the players, but they don't get to hand out xp bonuses (well, in some games, they do as some games do have "players' choice" xp bonuses).</blockquote>

Verification