Bribing Players during PCGen

[Herobizkit]

Being penalized mechnaically (or "left out") for choosing a character outside of your campaign's style choices certainly might rub me the wrong way. I happen to be one of those play-along types, though, so if you (as GM) asked me to make a human, I probably would. I'd still want to be a Bard, though.

If you really want to be heavy-handed about it, just explain that your campaign is humanocentric to the point of snobbery. Any non-human races will be seen (and treated) as slaves or property. Non-humans will be charged double, triple, or flat-out refused goods and services. Basically, give 'em the Drow treatment, but don't let them "put up their hoods" and suddenly disappear from scrutiny.

 

[tuxgeo]

Del, the thing is, for the idea I had in mind, I was thinking I'd *want* to see Arcane, Primal, and Divine classes. I just wanted to see more Martial characters - and wondered if it's right to skew the results that way?

[Context: using 4E rules. . . .]
How about a free feat for each PC, with this twist: Each character has to start in a Martial main class, but each PC also gets a free Multiclass feat at first level (in addition to the usual feats provided by core rules). That way, you are not penalizing anybody in particular; nobody has cause to feel resentful of somebody else who got a special benefit; you get your Martial emphasis; and the players can still go a bit farther into multiclassing than usual because of the free feat.
If that's not enough power-source variety, make it two free Multiclassing feats: one at first level to take another Class, and another feat selected at will from among Novice Power, Acolyte Power, and Adept Power at the character levels where they become available.

 

[Dice4Hire]

If all-martial is your goal, I would either A

Go martial, there are enough martial classes to cover what you need (Butthen again I don't think controllers are critical)

Hybrid everything to give a strong martial flavor and a good amount of variety.

But I see no need to offer bribes of feats or such. If that is the only way to get your players on board, eitehr listen to their desires more and do a different campaign, or look for different players.

 

[Elric]

As I said before, this may be a good time for an auction!

There may be a coordination problem here, as you may be fine with one PC that doesn't fit the mold, but 2 or 3 people want to play PCs of those classes.

If so, you could hold an auction for the right to play the mold-breaking PC, the proceeds to go to the "provide food for gaming night" fund. One mechanism: a "sealed price, first-bid auction": everyone writes down a $ amount, then reveal them. The person with the highest bid pays his own bid and gets to make a character that breaks the usual mold.

 

[Starfox]

I did this for races in my 4E Greyhawk game, giving humans a +2 bonus to two fixed stats depending on origin. So Sueloise humans had +2 Int, +2 Strength, for example. I ended up with 3 humans and 2 nonhumans. I don't think it would have been different had I not. If you use such a directed benefit, I would suggest making it minor.

More common around here is that the GM says something like "no more than one nonhuman and two spellcasters in this campaign". Then the players have to agree on who plays what, or its simply use first come first served.

If you have a repressed class/race, make it pretty clear if you want your players to play and/or sympathize with their plight or not. When 3E was new, I played in a game where Wizards are persecuted but sorcerers are not. I think the DM's idea was for players to play wizards and pretend to be sorcerers. But we had no wizards in the party, instead I played a sorcerer and to a degree flaunted my powers. We met some wizards, that we generally helped maintain the illusion that they were sorcerers, without really getting involved. This all seemed to make the DM kind of frustrated and the arc was abandoned, and none of the players really understood why.

 

[Wik]

Elric - the idea of an auction could be fun. I'm thinking now, though, that maybe just an out and out saying "this is what I'd like to see" could work... my only problem there would be that EVERYONE would play a martial character. And since I've worked out some neat fantasy variations on how magic works, how primal magic works, and how religion works, it'd be a shame to see those parts of the game completely neglected by PCs.

Hence where the "bribe" came from. It still allows those non-martial characters (and I know of at least one person in my group who would actively go against a bribe, simply for the opportunity to play a "rare" character), while helping preserve the main "theme" a little bit.

The campaign I had in mind, by the way, isn't one I intend on running any time soon. It's more just something I work on when I get the writing itch. But, it's a dark ages setting (post "roman") with some pretty heavy early medieval overtones, mixed with germanic and celtic barbarians and the 1960s civil rights movement (half-orcs rightfully petitioning for their rights as "citizens", some peacefully, some violently).

I think putting a race cap on the group might work, though. "At least half of you must be human" would probably be fine... especially because I have a lot of human backgrounds (in the FR version, not the PHB 2 method) figured out. Classes just seemed a bit... trickier.

 

[Janx]

Ah, I see. Tricky.

My gut feeling is that if you offer a 'bribe' to players to favour Martial characters, you'll probably end up with the party consisting of only Martial characters.

I would suggest that your best bet might be to simply explain what you would like to see to your players. Assuming they're reasonable, you should end up with the group you want without any hassle - anyone who has been considering running a Martial character for a while will just consider this a good opportunity to do exactly that.

You could also say "Guys, for this campaign I want to limit some of the power sources. So, anyone can play a Martial character, but I want no more than one Primal character and no more than one Arcane or Divine character... you can fight it out amongst yourselves for who plays what." This would probably get you the party you were wanting, but it's a bit more risky - both because my experience is that players have objected more to a limit than to a simple ban (odd, I know), and also because it might cause bad feelings between Al and Bob if they both wanted to play the Primal character, and only one of them got it.

I think my advice would be to just speak to your players - they're probably a reasonable bunch.

Del makes excellent points.

Rewinding just a moment, though:

The OP is talking about rules for the campaign. In my parlance, these are Campaign Rules, not House Rules. House Rules generally apply to any campaign played in a specified game edition. Campaign rules apply to just that campaign or game world.

Back to where Del left off. Del is pointing out that the OP's goal may not be served by the rule changes he is making. Thus, before making a rule, make sure you have clearly defined the problem and the effect you'd like to see.

In this case, it seems that the OP wants to encourage more martial PCs, and less magic PCs, but not totally eliminate them.

The simplest solution is probably to just talk with the players. You might define a number of "slots" so players have to negotiate or bid for them, thus limiting the total arcane PCs.

If you simply make 1 class better than another, then odds are good, nobody will play the lesser class (with some exceptions).

 

[Iron Sky]

I think the easiest way to "bribe" the characters without mechanically unbalancing things too much would be something like:

Anyone who plays a human starts as a minor noble, son of a wealthy merchant, or from some other organization with recognizable clout. Not only would there be RP advantages to this(NPC assistance, contacts, etc), but they could also get a "stipend" from their organization/parents or profits from their business, etc. Something like, they get a bonus treasure parcel 10 every level or every other level just for them.

Might also start them out with extra gold with how much being up to you; 100 is enough for a couple pots, 360 is enough for a level 1 item...

Martial characters could also/instead be part of some large wide-spread military organization (Road Wardens, Rangers, the Black Shield Mercenary Company, etc). Aside from the RP benefits, they might get another small stipend like the one above, a level-appropriate squad of minions of their level each time they visit an outpost to use as they will or the like.

With either of these, not only would it have in-game justification, but it also gives you easy plot-hookage, built-in PC background, etc.

You could also let other class types get benefits as well, just scaled according to which you want in the game.

For example, you might tell your players:

"Martial characters are members of the Black Shield Mercenaries. Not only do you get regular, sizable wages, but you have enough rank to commandeer a squadron of troops at any Black Shield outpost."

"Divine characters are members of the Red Templar. They don't get wages, but get a minor discount on potions and other consumables when they buy them from Templar Enclaves."

"Primal characters are members of the Scar Cliffs Tribe. The tribe was broken and scattered a decade ago, but their remnants have set up small holdings all around the edges of civilization. There are no mechanical benefits to this, but the Tribe may lend some aid in other ways."

"Arcane characters are considered witches and hunted down in many civilized areas unless they go through rigorous examinations and pay "license fees" at every new town or city they go to, and even then are viewed with distrust."

"Shadow or Psionic characters are considered demons and are the only thing more reviled than Arcane characters. Should their origins be discovered, they face immediate man-hunts and burning at the stake."

My $.02 anyway.

 

[Meridius]

Conflict situation:
I've devised a low-magic world.
But one of the players wants to play a mage.

I could disallow magic-users. Not fun for mage-wannabe.

I could discourage and bribe non-magic users, mage-wannabe still plays mage, bribe only works to advantage other players, since the mage still has his mage. Not fun for me, since I just did something that is slightly useless, and I have a magic user not under my control in my low-magic world.


I think I would simply allow both, but I would tell the mage-player that he has to take into account he's playing in a low-magic-world. Popular and powerful spells will be gone, and his considerable might will be somewhat reduced to magician level (in the real-world theatrical sense of the word). I would however alter the mage in such a way that going partially martial is easier than usual. So he should be useful, and he should command extra respect from NPC's since he's so rare. I would also demand a convincing back-story. I would want the mage to know he or she is not going to be heavy artillery, but rather a very valuable magic toolbox.

I would probably disallow many combat-potent spells, and possibly encourage the player to think up spells him- or herself, within my house-rules of course.

If your player asks for something, respect that. If you do that, you'll get that same respect returned a lot easier for playing a low-magic campaign.

That, or just plainly go for a NO-magic setting. However, I would recommend asking your players first, if there's people who absolutely want to play a caster, try to work out something.

 

[Starfox]

The campaign I had in mind [...] it's a dark ages setting (post "roman") with some pretty heavy early medieval overtones, mixed with germanic and celtic barbarians and the 1960s civil rights movement (half-orcs rightfully petitioning for their rights as "citizens", some peacefully, some violently).

I think putting a race cap on the group might work, though. "At least half of you must be human" would probably be fine... especially because I have a lot of human backgrounds (in the FR version, not the PHB 2 method) figured out. Classes just seemed a bit... trickier.

Do you want half-ork players? If you want the half-ork-rights movement to matter, you probably should give an incentive to play them. This need be no more than a hit that this will be a campaign element, and that half-orks will get more screen time because of it. Suddenly, a high-charisma half-ork becomes a viable option, because these people would not listen to humans. Or perhaps you do not want half-ork players, preferring a von oben look at the civil rights movement, where it might present more of a problem than an opportunity.

The most important thing is not to spring these things on your players as a surprise. Make the consequences clear and say what options you want to explore. If your "bribes" grow naturally out of the campaign, they will make sense to your players. And the bribe need not actually be a benefit - I know my players would strongly consider half-ork in the setting you describe merely to get camera time.