Finally getting some use out of Chapter 4 (Other than Backgrounds)

[Sadras]

I've felt, for a long time now, that my players were not using their PCs' characteristics to earn Inspiration and just in general, not playing up to their flaws and ideals, as much as I'd like them to.

So I finally attempted to change this in our last session. I noted all the PCs' flaws, some had more than one. One PC had the flaw Impatient another had Self-Absorbed.

In a planned ambush awaiting for the BBEG to show up, the Impatient fighter PC was meant to stand within 30 feet away from the sorcerer who was tasked with casting Haste on him.

I offered the fighter to play on his flaw Impatient, by having him be just outside the range of the Haste spell for that first round of combat and this due to his character's over-eager pacing while waiting for the BBEG. In exchange he would earn himself an Inspiration point. He liked the idea and surprisingly agreed to it.

I proposed to the player with the Self-Absorbed character that her PC would be deep in thought at the time of the BBEG (which made sense with her backstory given the relationship with this BBEG), resulting in her going last in the round of combat, essentially an initiative roll of 1. She agreed to it thereby earning herself an Inspiration point.

Just to be clear, the above were like soft compels (Fate) and did not cost the players anything upon refusal, unlike in Fate where it costs a Fate point when the player refuses. Thinking out aloud: Perhaps introducing a 1 HD cost would be fair with a limit of 1 or 2 compels of different characteristics (aspects) per session.

Both players enjoyed the use of playing up their flaws, instigating a situational setback in exchange for a mechanical benefit. My intention is to continue with this process, introducing the rest of the personality characteristics and hopefully get the players to start petitioning me, instead of having me to do all the creative legwork.

 

[DEFCON 1]

This is exactly how I do it.

None of the PCs in my games have bonds, ideals, or personality traits (outside of how they choose to roleplay)... the only thing they have is a Hubris-- a Flaw. Every PC has that one thing that is their tragic flaw... the one thing that if they ever were going to be done in by because of who they are... that Hubris would be what caused it. This is basically taken straight out of the 7th Sea RPG, who used Hubrises as defining character traits. (Yes, you also could take a positive Virtue, but the cost to do so was so high very few players in any of my groups ever did.)

The advantage of having just the one, single Hubris is that it is much easier for all manner of player, of all differing skill, to understand it, and play it in the game. In addition, it is much easier for that one thing to color everything a PC might do-- if a PC is Arrogant for example, a player understands it and can think about just being that. They don't have to worry about a long list of other things their characters know or feel or behave in order to try and get Inspiration... they are just Arrogant in all things and they know if they behave in that way on occasion, they will be rewarded.

And what is easiest for me is that I am able to learn this Hubris for each character pretty early in the game and can then offer up Inspiration to those players at opportune times (like you did.) I hold up the Inspiration chip and tell them "You know, as an Arrogant person, you believe you're more than capable of doing this thing yourself that this other NPC is giving their expertise on. I'll give you Inspiration if you refuse their service." They then can decide whether taking the chip is worth losing the potential assistance. I don't charge them for not taking it, but to all my players not claiming the chip is essentially the charge, because all of them know that having a chip to spend later on for Advantage on an important roll is key. And since they don't always have them available... having one offered up but not taken is like being charged. And thus for the most part... players willingly make things more difficult for themselves by going with their Hubris and taking the chip, so they have it available later on for much more important rolls.

This system has made for much more interesting characters, and make for more interesting results for adventures because no one is always just "playing it safe", which can get boring time after time.

 

[iserith]

I put all this on the players so I don't have to remember anything or suggest to them how to play their characters: The Case for Inspiration.

 

[Sadras]

This system has made for much more interesting characters, and make for more interesting results for adventures because no one is always just "playing it safe", which can get boring time after time.

This is the mindset I'm trying to change, to not have PCs hold onto their Inspiration for rainy days but spend them more easily and have their character's not play it safe, embracing complications to earn that Inspiration back.
One direct way would be to not have characters regain Inspiration from Long Rests which is a route I'm considering as it makes Inspiration far more valuable.

I like your use of the Arrogant flaw/hubris.

 

[Sadras]

I put all this on the players so I don't have to remember anything or suggest to them how to play their characters: The Case for Inspiration.

I did do this @iserith, and even followed AngryDM's article on Inspiration, but my players did not engage with it - so I did what I did. Honestly I expected it to be more difficult to remember everyone's characteristics and try incorporate them, hence I only introduced flaws (for now) but surprisingly it went well.

EDIT: I think as they become more accustomed to being "compelled" the more they will engage with the process and start negotiating with me.

 

[iserith]

I did do this @iserith, and even followed AngryDM's article on Inspiration, but my players did not engage with it - so I did what I did. Honestly I expected it to be more difficult to remember everyone's characteristics and try incorporate them, hence I only introduced flaws (for now) but surprisingly it went well.

EDIT: I think as they become more accustomed to being "compelled" the more they will engage with the process and start negotiating with me.

It's weird when players given the option to gain a resource that gives them advantage when they need it at practically no cost don't go for it. I suspect this might have something to do with the difficulty of the challenges being presented in the game, but it could be many things.

 

[Sadras]

I suspect this might have something to do with the difficulty of the challenges being presented in the game, but it could be many things.

Interesting, did not consider this. Thanks. Might be something I need to discuss with the table.

 

[iserith]

Interesting, did not consider this. Thanks. Might be something I need to discuss with the table.

One other side note, as some people I play with who are also DMs are discussing it in Discord: Players who aren't particularly system savvy might not see Inspiration as valuable even with its low cost and high return. In a sea of options, it may not stand out as a thing they should be regularly claiming and spending.

There may also be a correlation to how much action-oriented content is covered in a single session. If the group likes to spend a lot of time in low-stakes scenes e.g. planning, shopping or other errands, idle chit-chat at the tavern, etc., then the game might not have a high enough frequency of rolls with meaningful consequences of failure such that Inspiration is a hot commodity. In a game like mine, the low-stakes scenes are almost always going to be exposition that sets up the next higher-stakes scene and so these sorts of situations are minimized. Most of the session is spent boldly confronting deadly perils or trying to find/talk to stuff where failure would suck. As a result, most players get all four Inspiration every session. They need it!

 

[DEFCON 1]

Another thing that might hinder them is that many bonds, ideals, and traits oftentimes can be so wide-open or wishy-washy that they literally could be applied to almost anything they do and thus they just feel odd trying to claim it.

If someone has a trait of something like "I always look for the best advantage in any situation", that's so obvious and applicable that it might just wash off of them. They could claim it almost all the time in any situation and at some point it makes you wonder just how character defining it really is?

I've found that's what was the hindrance for me to the full system when I used it for my first 5E campaigns... they just were too... wishy-washy is really the best word I have for it. "I always look out for my friends!" Well, of course you do. Who doesn't? Why are you being rewarded for something that everybody does? When you have four or more of these things that can apply all the time, none of which seem to really define a character all that well... players might not feel right in claiming them in rather uninteresting or uncompelling situations, and thus it makes the system potentially fall apart.

Either that, or they have a incredibly specific trait that as a DM you have to work extra-hard to ever have it come up in the game just so you could let them activate it. "I like eggs." Okay, great... now how or when exactly am I going to put you in a situation when you could actually try and claim Inspiration because you like eggs? Because more often than not... the one time you put eggs in an adventure for that one player is the night that player isn't able to show up.

 

[iserith]

Another thing that might hinder them is that many bonds, ideals, and traits oftentimes can be so wide-open or wishy-washy that they literally could be applied to almost anything they do and thus they just feel odd trying to claim it.

If someone has a trait of something like "I always look for the best advantage in any situation", that's so obvious and applicable that it might just wash off of them. They could claim it almost all the time in any situation and at some point it makes you wonder just how character defining it really is?

I've found that's what was the hindrance for me to the full system when I used it for my first 5E campaigns... they just were too... wishy-washy is really the best word I have for it. "I always look out for my friends!" Well, of course you do. Who doesn't? Why are you being rewarded for something that everybody does? When you have four or more of these things that can apply all the time, none of which seem to really define a character all that well... players might not feel right in claiming them in rather uninteresting or uncompelling situations, and thus it makes the system potentially fall apart.

My experience is that even if the player has an "easy" characteristic to claim for Inspiration, there's a certain amount of social credit that comes with using even the "easy" ones in a way that is just a bit more clever than the last guy or gal to have claimed Inspiration. So what I'll see is someone holding out on that "easy" one until the perfect moment for the most impact, sometimes even going out of their way to set things up just so. Not always, but often that's the case.

Either that, or they have a incredibly specific trait that as a DM you have to work extra-hard to ever have it come up in the game just so you could let them activate it. "I like eggs." Okay, great... now how or when exactly am I going to put you in a situation when you could actually try and claim Inspiration because you like eggs? Because more often than not... the one time you put eggs in an adventure for that one player is the night that player isn't able to show up.

I find there's usually one characteristic that is harder to portray than others and that's often the Bond. But when it fits perfectly it's all the more satisfying. (As an aside, the PCs in my Eberron game are on a bug hunt and there are a lot of eggs!)