That's how the game is mean to be played. I show you, in example, how the system doesn't make sense for the Conan universe.
The GM doesn't track where the points come from. He just looks at the Threat Jar and uses the points when he wants--when he thinks he can squeeze the most drama out of it.
This contradicts what you said before, as you gave me an example of a player in followup session being punished 'Because I have a lot of points' by the DM from the actions of a
different player who he knew generated the threat in the previous session. Again, not having read the rules, and given you keep implying a jar full of buttons (i.e. lots of threat generated) the only way a DM wouldn't know who generated it if it came from a single source was if it is generated in secret. And it's not.
Now you're suggesting that the DM doesn't know who generated the threat because he "doesn't track where the points come from" which implies it came from more than one source, which of course means it was party generated threat and the DM should feel free to spend it on the party just like the party felt free to buy dice to gain an advantage against him. It's even. And the common sense solution is if you don't want the DM to be able to leverage large amounts of threat against you, then don't generate the threat to begin with.
I totally disagree. The mechanic doesn't drive RP at all. It drives focus on mechanics and Threat Points and game rules.
A character isn't being role played better if he throws 5 dice at a task rather than his normal 2 dice. He's just throwing more dice and doing things, mechanically, that he normally wouldn't be able to do. That's not role playing. That's rolling high.
The player drives the RP, not the dice. The mechanic gives the player a tool and an opportunity to add flavor to the RP much the same as a ability stat or skill bonus does, only the dice are not static, are tangible, and are implemented at player/DM discretion. I gave you examples of this which can unquestionably be tied to RP (again, keeping in mind that the player drives the RP, it's up to them to facilitate it). If I want to RP a fighter good at fighting I give him a high stat in Strength and the dice-buy mechanic gives me the option to RP a bonus in a situation using additional dice. It's as much role play as anything else.
In fact, it finally adds the potential for a RP mechanic to the dice roll given it only happens at the whim of player agency. In other words, I always roll a dice for combat - nothing special about that - but now I can choose when I want to roll extra dice, and why that is. That's an RP moment.
It drives RP for the very reason you have pointed out. That is, if players just run around and buy dice willy-nilly (as you have suggested at least 1 player will), the DM has a large pool of threat to use against them. So they don't do this, because it would be stupid. Rather, they pick-and-choose when to use this mechanic so as not to face too much in retaliation, saving this mechanic and these resources for times in which they really need to pick that lock, or really need to land that hit, or really need to convince that NPC to do something. You know, RP moments that drive the story and have you talking about that game - and that moment in the game - for years to come.
At some point, the GM uses Threat Points, yes? When the GM uses Threat Points, do things get easier for the players or harder? Are obstacles easier to overcome when Threat Points are used or harder?
The relationship is clear. Players buy extra dice to roll higher than normal. This results in Threat Points that are used against the party sometime later in the scenario, either that same game session or later. Therefore, being heroic is punished, and the person who was heroic is not always the one punished.
But that doesn't have anything to do with the scenario as you presented it, or as I responded to it. In your scenario the DM punishes the thief because of an asshat in the previous session, for no good reason. Why would a DM do that? The DM isn't responding in an RP method, he's just responding to be a dick. That's what you said here:
I can't look at the player with a serious face and say, "Well, Jazzen the Pirate built up a lot of Threat in our game two weeks ago when his character was trying to keep from drowning. Yeah, I know Jazzen drowned anyway, but the Threat is still in the Jar. I've got a lot of points to spend.",
And the 'punishment' is not in excess of the reward received for buying the dice in the first place. So once again, everything is equal. Heroism is no more punished than it is rewarded and no player was ever punished in excess of the reward received for being in the group which gained the bonus from the dice buy. Just because the fighter buys dice to kill the troll and thereby generates threat, doesn't mean that the wizard in the group didn't also benefit from him doing so.
This is going to sound crappy, but I don't mean it that way. I'm sincere in asking, how long have you been gaming?
Because what you say here is not roleplaying at all. It's rolling dice.
Wait.. wait... wait. You have players in your game not acting like reasonable players - certainly not roleplaying, or acting in the best interests of the group... you have a DM (or are the DM) not behaving like a good DM - certainly not roleplaying, and in fact going out of your way to repeatedly and punitively punish other players who, by your own admission are not culpable for the asshattery of another individual... and you're suggesting that I'm the one that doesn't RP?
Even the responses you're giving in your own scenarios are not driven by RP. Why not try to solve your problem with the mechanic in an RP friendly method? Every example you've given does nothing to support your suggested interest in being a "role player".
I quote the above because that clearly describes some of my problems with the game's system. If you don't agree. That's OK. If you like the new 2d20 system, then that's way OK, too. People have different tastes.
I was asked what I didn't like about the game, and I responded, in detail.
I'm not really looking to get into a long discussion about it. I think my points are clear.
If you like the system used with the new Conan RPG, then support it on kickstarter and go with God.
It's definitely not something for me.
This was a good discussion, and we can do that and still disagree.
Like I said when I read your first post I agreed with just about everything you said until I actually thought about it and realized that all you've done is identify how someone might go about abusing the system if they wanted to abuse it, and were allowed to do so.
In much the same way, as a DM I could have a handful of players roll up some 1st level characters and then throw the Tarrasque at them to fight. I could do that... because it's in the monster manual and I'm the DM and if I wanted to abuse the system, I could... but why would I? No one would want to play with me. Likewise a player would never do the things you're suggesting they would do with threat and be allowed back at the table or not expect the DM to respond by also spending threat on them. Players would never tolerate a militant DM who was hell-bent on using mechanics to repeatedly, unnecessarily, and unjustly punish their character for the misdeeds of another, or at least they certainly wouldn't get mad at him for doing so AFTER they had already reaped the benefits from the bonuses.
To me, the scenarios as you have presented them are simply fabrications and gross exaggerations of people intentionally trying to abuse a mechanic, and that can be done with any mechanic.
A much more realistic scenario than the ones you have presented is that
sometimes players will use the mechanic to generate a bonus when they feel they need it, and
sometimes the DM will spend threat to create a disadvantage when he feels it's needed. Some players will just roll added dice, and some players will tie the event in with RP.
Personally I think it sounds like a really dynamic mechanic, and an excellent opportunity for the player or DM to choose when to enable and add some really interesting story to a given situation. Somewhat akin to a Matt Mercer moment, where, when someone rolls a critical hit, he asks them, 'Ok, how do you want to do this?'