Core materials: Action Points and Insider

[Agamon]

I don't like Action Points, not because I'm a "killer DM" with delusions of grandeur, but because they are not organic to the game. They seem necessary because of the incessant power-creep (which has frankly become a power run) that infects the "official" materials. If there's little the PCs can't do, there's little way to really challenge them. I have no hope whatsoever that the 4th edition is going to solve this. In fact, everything I seen so far indicates the opposite.

I'm not a killer DM with delusions of grandeur either. But I need to relay this message to the players of the 39 dead PCs from my Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil game. There's been 16 deaths in the half done AoW AP, too. Damn good thing they're not being challenged!

 

[Agamon]

You can do better than hyperbole, right? There is a difference between people having fun because their characters are dead, and people having fun because the CHANCE for it exists in the game, and comes pretty close sometimes.

But, even with APs, there's a still a chance of death, right? I've heard of Eberron PCs dying. I've actually witnessed a few M&M PC deaths. I recently killed an opponent's star witch elf in a blood bowl game, despite the fact that he had an apothecary on the sidelines (okay, that's not an RPG, but it's the same idea).

These are the two facts, as I see them.

1. No fear of death does not necessarily mean no fun (depends on one's opinion).

2. APs do not erase death 100% from the game.

Oh no, the rules are taking away my leet DM powerz! Shyeah, right! Any DM worth his salt can kill any PC if he wants, using any D&D ruleset. I guarantee it! Prove me wrong and I'll eat my RBDM membership card.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

But, even with APs, there's a still a chance of death, right? I've heard of Eberron PCs dying. I've actually witnessed a few M&M PC deaths. I recently killed an opponent's star witch elf in a blood bowl game, despite the fact that he had an apothecary on the sidelines (okay, that's not an RPG, but it's the same idea).

These are the two facts, as I see them.

1. No fear of death does not necessarily mean no fun (depends on one's opinion).

2. APs do not erase death 100% from the game.

Oh no, the rules are taking away my leet DM powerz! Shyeah, right! Any DM worth his salt can kill any PC if he wants, using any D&D ruleset. I guarantee it! Prove me wrong and I'll eat my RBDM membership card.

Whoa there, cool it a bit, no need to let some people's extremes to get under your skin. Sure it's easy to kill characters, even with some kind of action point mechanic in the game. Most games I know that feature such still feature rules to keep anything deadly from being auto-kill, too. D&D has saving throws because magic works automatically. L5R enforces target numbers and caster checks. Shadowrun enforces caster checks AND resistance tests to scale down the effect again. Both also have Karma/Void points that can be used in desperate moments...usually they ARE used when the character feels Death breathing down his neck. And I had people dying in both games still. So yeah, if the mechanics are done right, it would add something to D&D.

And for those arguing that it's "not natural" or not "in character"...it's a wild card resource the character doesn't have direct access to, but that is still connected to him: his luck. Hero's Luck. Something that CAN tip the scales of balance, represented by the DM and the dice, a tiny bit in the PC's favor. And just as the player controls the spells, attacks, saving throws etc, he also controls that tiny bit of additional luck his hero can have if he really needs it. And honestly, that's a feature of SO many fantasy stories of old it would fit right in with D&D of any edition, as long as it's not overdone.

 

[Felon]

In Star Wars terms, what you are describing here is going up on the Conditions chart. Not second wind. Going from damaged with laser burns to not damaged at all is not in character and it is a totally fictional concept.

The first thing that occurs to me is that your definition of what "in-character" means seems pretty elusive.

The second is that since hit points are an abstract concept, so are the mechanics for their loss or recovery. A character recovering HP by taking a second wind is an acceptable simulation of what it takes for someone to recover from trauma by mustering a combination of adrenaline, oxygen, and willpower. One need not go from damaged by laser burns to not damaged at all, one simply needs to reach a point where the burns don't traumatiz you any more.

And I want NPCs to have the same abilities as PCs. There should be nothing in the game system that tattoes PC on the PC's forehead.

Who are you worried about seeing this tattoo? As action points are purely a game mechanic, they don't emlazon anything on the character that makes them perceptably different from an NPC.

I think players are pretty aware of how they are inherently different from NPC's in that they must survive in order for the story to continue, and they must do so while on-panel the entire time. I suspect that very few DM's have ever asked all of the PC's to get up and leave the room so he could have a private session with himself.

I want a few "go to the well" abilities for PCs (not players, PCs) to pull out when it is all going south

Second winds are pretty much the epitome of a go-to-the-well ability. But you do make some distinction between a PC ability and a player ability that bears explanation.

 

[Victim]

I don't like action points, at least in 3.x. The basic function of an AP is to add a bonus to a d20 roll. That's A) not all that special - characters can get tons of other bonuses, and B) has some significant impacts since d20 isn't particularly symmetric. They tend to weaken attacks relying on saves, and strengthen beatdown attacks. Our PCs in Eberron were in far more danger from conventional attacks than anything save based. Plus, by the end, all of our casters had Action Surge to convert their AP into offense.

 

[Felon]

I, on the other hand, am shamelessly and unrepentantly old-school. I do not buy into the current game design philosophy WOTC, or their apparent vision of the emasculated DM. I believe the best DMs are equal parts referee, storyteller, world-builder, social director, game-designer, and stage magician. The stage magician part comes in with misdirecting the players into believing you mean to kill their PCs them while actually trying to keep them alive. IMHO all the "empowerment" of players is an attempt to appeal to CRPG and MMORPG players who are used to playing without a DM.

How about making the players think your NPC's are attempting to kill them, and then they prevail because of the resources they bring to bear, rather than due to any surreptitious DM deux ex machina?

Provide specifics, please. Tell us how WotC has some grand vision of castrating DM's everywhere. Is your reasoning based on some kind of zero-sum logic--that in order for the DM to be empowered, the players must be powerless? They should just be pieces the DM moves around on his board, acting on his cue?

I've had my full of that brand of old-school DMing. It has less to do with game mechanics than a DM believing that he's running a campaign solely for his own satisfaction, and if players aren't enjoying themselves, that's hardly any concern of his.

 

[KarinsDad]

How about making the players think your NPC's are attempting to kill them, and then they prevail because of the resources they bring to bear, rather than due to any surreptitious DM deux ex machina?

That's how I view Action Points and Second Winds.

They are Player deux ex machina. Sure, not as potent as DM deux ex machina, but they effectively amount to the same thing.

Lowering risk, but when the player decides to do so.

 

[Szatany]

"Don't like 'em, don't use 'em" is a good concept, but its not certain it will be possible. If action points are integrated into class features, removing them may be very difficult. What if one of the rogue's core abilities is a higher number of action points than other classes?

I have a feeling halflings will have something like that. Their racial powers are supposed to revolve around luck theme.

 

[WhimsyTheFae]

That's how I view Action Points and Second Winds.

They are Player deux ex machina. Sure, not as potent as DM deux ex machina, but they effectively amount to the same thing.

Lowering risk, but when the player decides to do so.

So, is this a purely philosophical issue? I mean, is it important who gets to decide when to lower risk?

I would rather that the player decide when to do that (and no, I'm not a player...I hate playing...I'm a power-hungry control-freak ). I also like that Action Points are a limited resource (at least I hope that they are not too plentiful, too powerful and/or too easily replenished).

As far as Action Points being a player mechanic, as opposed to a PC mechanic, I can see the concern. Heck, I don't like NPC classes for similar reasons. It sets PCs apart from other folk in the world. In the end, I decided that it doesn't hurt my games if the PCs are special and if the players have some mechanics of their own.

I suppose that you could just give your NPCs Action Points, as well. Other than that, I don't think that there will be a satifactory answer and am afraid that you may be disappointed.

 

[Felon]

That's how I view Action Points and Second Winds.

They are Player deux ex machina. Sure, not as potent as DM deux ex machina, but they effectively amount to the same thing.

Lowering risk, but when the player decides to do so.

Well, that's an accurate assessment. I just don't see what suffers in that scenario. For players, it's lame to be rescued by an external set of factors that have nothing to do with their skill or instincts. I don't know why a DM would resent a bodak failing to kill a player because some finite resource was expended. There's still that moment of tension from turning instant death into a near miss. And there's always another bodak somewhere...