Hero Points / Action Points - Yay or Nay?

[Croesus]

...I'm not very positive even to have them in a module, because there is so much variance on how people want them to be implemented, that it might be best to just leave them for house rules.

I disagree. The variance you mention is exactly why I think a module for action points would be a great idea. The module could offer several different implementations, similar to how they been used in other versions of D&D and even other games like Savage Worlds. I think one of the problems with actions points in the past is that they can have a lot of ripple effects throughout the game system, and therefore are exactly the type of mechanic that is most difficult to houserule well.

Personally I like the idea of a mechanic that can limit the impact of just plain bad luck, and allows players to do cool stuff, but otherwise doesn't muck about with damage output, power level, etc. A bit of a fine line, which is why I'd rather pay someone to come up with such a system, rather than trying to kludge it together myself.

 

[dd.stevenson]

I use them sometimes, and sometimes I don't. So put them in a module and I'll be fine.

 

[KidSnide]

I'm not fond of them because they are a primarily gamist construction that isn't well tied to any aspect of the in-game fiction. Although you can express them as an "extra effort" ability, they are more of a player resource than a character resource. Also, a rich variety of character abilities already generates a number of abilities for players to track. The core rules should add more rules constructs for their own sake.

That all having been said, hero points are a useful tool for changing the tone of a game. By providing a mechanism that allows PCs to usually succeed when they really want to succeed, you get a different adventure dynamic that works better when the group is aiming for a "pulp adventure" tone.

Hero points can also work as a feedback mechanism (where players earn them for taking cool, or otherwise genre appropriate actions) that encourages players to match the tone of the game. If players can earn a hero point for attempting a ridiculous stunt, players will attempt a lot more ridiculous stunts. That's a very efficient way to run a very different style game with the same core rules.

-KS

 

[Gold Roger]

My favorite version of hero points are the fate points found in most warhammer roleplay systems. They can be used to gain minor advantage (and regained after a long rest), or permanently burned for greater effect (usually to avoid certain death).

Something like that would be great to offset any "gritty" modules on the game balance scale.

Modular is the word here. I could see there being up to three different such modules (say fate, hero and action points). Most use the one that suits their group, many use none and few use two or all systems.

 

[Shroomy]

I voted sure, why not, as long as they're part of an optional module. However, in D&D Next, I think I'd use them in the following way:

1. They're a limited, daily resource that refresh after a long rest; I don't think I'd introduce a mechanism to gain more throughout the day.

2. When you spend them, you gain advantage on your next attack, ability, or skill check.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

I would like to see some sort of system, yes. I don't think points should grant additional actions though - that's a little too gamist for my liking. I'd prefer them granting rerolls, either for you or someone doing something against you, as a twist of fate.

I would also prefer if they weren't given out automatically. Not every two encounters, nor every day or week. The DM should give them out as rewards only - either for completing significant quests, or achieving a personal roleplaying goal. You have to do something to earn the right to play the protagonist (and therefore have fate on your side).

 

[delericho]

It depends on just what you mean by Action Points.

If you're talking about 4e Action Points which grant the PC an extra action, then I like them. The one big change I'd make to the 4e model is to give each PC an action point every encounter (but make it a use-it-or-lose-it resource). I've found that the most fun I've had with 4e have been those occasions when I've been able to use an Action Point for maximum effect.

If you're talking about Action Points as in d20 Modern, Eberron, or Star Wars Force Points, or any similar Hero Point mechanic, then I don't like them. Not at all.

Having said that... I don't think any of these things should be in the core, and I wouldn't be opposed to them existing in a module.

 

[El Mahdi]

Absolutely Yes, they should be included...and I'll most certainly use them. But, I know not everyone likes them, so they should probably be a module.

 

[Greg K]

I answered as core. However, I do not want them working the way that they have in D&D where you you get x amount to use per level. I want them working like True20 Conviction/M&M Hero Points, Savage Worlds Bennies, or Cortex Classic Plot Points where you start with x per day or adventure and gain more by playing up you character's nature/ complications/drawbacks, doing heroic things, when the GM screws your character over/fiat, etc.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

That all having been said, hero points are a useful tool for changing the tone of a game. By providing a mechanism that allows PCs to usually succeed when they really want to succeed, you get a different adventure dynamic that works better when the group is aiming for a "pulp adventure" tone.

Hero points can also work as a feedback mechanism (where players earn them for taking cool, or otherwise genre appropriate actions) that encourages players to match the tone of the game. If players can earn a hero point for attempting a ridiculous stunt, players will attempt a lot more ridiculous stunts. That's a very efficient way to run a very different style game with the same core rules.

This is the way I like Hero/Action points. So I voted for in a module instead of core. I'm open to the idea of a really simply Hero/Action point mechanic that could be in the core, but I think they work best when they deliberately change the game in some way, which does point to module.

Perhaps a good compromise would be not in the core system, but a simple version in a module that was included in a sidebar in the same book with the core rules? I still maintain that the core rulebook(s) should have a few highly useful/popular options included, if for no other reason to encourage people to think about which options they want to use. Anyway, it's hard to say where such a rule should go until you see how the rule is done.

Also, as per above, I very much like the use of such points as an alternate "currency"--as they allow all kinds of nifty gamist and narrative play to revolve around them that doesn't work nearly so well with XP, treasure, etc. In particular, I've found that awarding bonus Action Points instead of XP for "good roleplaying", "clever ideas", etc, simplifies the game. For me, XP is a pacing mechanism for character advancement, and breaks down when it has anything else attached to it. I even used a modified version of the Arcana Evolved Hero Points for a replacement of the 3E XP cost in magic item construction.

Finally, I absolutely despise an Action Point mechanic that is based on getting a set amount per level, and when they are used they are gone. I dislike nearly as much such a mechanic based on the idea of very rarely getting them. It's not much of a currency if people can't spend them because they have to save them for an emergency.