Pathfinder 2E Embedding Level Into The Narrative

[Campbell]

My issue with Inspiration as written is that it tends to reward characterization (sticking to personality quirks, getting into trouble in predictable ways) rather than playing a character as if they were a person with meaningful personal goals they try to accomplish.

 

[Parmandur]

My issue with Inspiration as written is that it tends to reward characterization (sticking to personality quirks, getting into trouble in predictable ways) rather than playing a character as if they were a person with meaningful personal goals they try to accomplish.

The latter usually evolves from the former in time.

 

[5ekyu]

My issue with Inspiration as written is that it tends to reward characterization (sticking to personality quirks, getting into trouble in predictable ways) rather than playing a character as if they were a person with meaningful personal goals they try to accomplish.

Here we agree.

Having gone through systems where you define your personality and tie it to "points" I keep coming back to how the best roleplaying, most evocative, most reactive and resilient- always came out in games where the "who" was not tied to points.

Did not matter whether it was pay-then-play (many systems, like HERO points up front for chargen for "disads") or pay-for-play (many systems like Cortex iirc or 5e inspiration where you get points when your point-traits play-in) the aspect of linking them to point values or success fail outside their nature tended to keep them static.

When they are just "who am i?" that has more freedom to change and evolve.

You play more person than looking for ways to hit that button.

As a GM, I reward roleplaying with role-playing - in-campaign story based stuff. The character's engagement brings things about.

For mechanical style benefits, some of the best I saw were more simple kinds of bonuses, like virtues from Ars Magica iirc. When you were acting with your virtues just added bonus. When opposed ' minus.

That way you didnt try roleplay your tripwire for inspiration that was chosen to get good flow for more rerolls... to use for death saves and not being dead. (If you were inspired by mechanics.)

Instead you role played a thing that was important to the character by actually doing that thing because (if inspired by its mechanics) it made you better at that.

All that said, a low resolution high gimmick system can be fine. But other than that I find the mix of cruch and gimmick driven to fail to play interesting.

 

[CapnZapp]

I find that the thing you want from a "gimmick point" system is narrative control. The ability as a player to say "my character knows this, he manages".

But in D&D the ability to say "My expertise is combat, let me handle it" makes no sense, since everything about D&D is geared toward actually playing out the combat in great detail, with large effort put towards everyone sharing the spotlight equally. In newer iterations of D&D every hero automatically knows combat and is expected to manage an about equal share of the glory.

Plus: combat is dozens of checks. Social and exploratory often hinges on the one roll, or half a dozen rolls at most. (Not to mention what Gumshoe et al has discovered, namely that investigative rolls are not meant to fail at all)

So.

Inspiration in combat makes no sense. Not only do you affect one out of twenty rolls, you don't need it to help bring out your character. Hitting and missing in combat is a fact of life equal to all heroes. Combat is strictly controlled and balance is paramount.

What separates one hero from the other is the abilities OUTSIDE combat. I might play the super sneak, whose reputation would be ruined if he somehow failed at a crucial character-defining pickpocketing attempt, or maybe to sneak past the guards.

You might play a self-described casanova and value the ability to not fail at seducing Countess Ivanova. The party druid might feel her concept would be tarnished by not befriending that owlbear. And so on.

But Inspiration only gives you a reroll. You can still fail.

That's so wrong. The whole idea is to not game it as usual, but provide narrative control to the player.

So.

Inspiration should definitely not be usable to decide a combat. And I guess it kind of isn't since few combats hinge on a single roll. (If one roll turns defeat into victory, chances are you would have won anyway).

Inspiration should definitely give out a success. No reroll, no bonus, just plain "don't roll just succeed".

Having said this, we haven't even started discussing the missed opportunity in integrating Inspiration better into the system, particularly the flaws and beliefs and whatnot you chose during chargen.

 

[Campbell]

Inspiration giving you advantage is a huge structural problem. I am playing an Ancestral Guardian Barbarian in the Fifth Edition game I am a player in. Nearly every element of the character touches on the advantage/disadvantage rules. I am pretty much already getting advantage to every meaningful action the character takes. Inspiration can do no work.

 

[CapnZapp]

Inspiration giving you advantage is a huge structural problem.

Hear ye, hear ye!