Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7818055" data-attributes="member: 6919838">Here we agree.Having gone through systems where you define your personality and tie it to &quot;points&quot; I keep coming back to how the best roleplaying, most evocative, most reactive and resilient- always came out in games where the &quot;who&quot; was not tied to points.Did not matter whether it was pay-then-play (many systems, like HERO points up front for chargen for &quot;disads&quot;) 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 &quot;who am i?&quot; 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.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="5ekyu, post: 7818055, member: 6919838"] 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. [/QUOTE]

Verification