Other incentives not to kill things

[weem]

As mentioned regarding pulling out XP as a reward for combat, and using Inherent Bonuses, this is a really cool thing that goes a long way towards calming the urge to kill everything...

...and having the right players helps a lot too (if not more than anything).

In my current campaign (my second 4e campaign, 10 games in now) I level the group when I feel like it's time, and we use inherent bonuses. On top of that...

1) I mix things up... some bad guys give up mid fight - it's just not worth it to them - but the rest continue. It adds a bit of chaos to the fight... does he want me to think he gave up so he can get behind me, or is he really giving up.

2) I reward the players for letting an enemy go, or letting them surrender - not every time, but it happens. I had a young man (who was part of a group the PC's were fighting) give up mid fight. The fight continued all around him and the PC's let him stay there on the floor, huddled down. After the fight, they questioned him and let him go. Two game sessions later, they are being hunted by a clan of thieves/thugs/etc so they hid in wagons belonging to an entertainment troupe who is leaving town. The men search the wagons... and one of them discovers the PC's... but it's the young man who they let go a few days before... the young man signals to his pals that the wagon is clear and moves on, effectively saving them in return. Good stuff.

3) I turn the tables on them - One example: I ran a game in my last campaign (again, 4e) where they had to work their way up an old, decrepit tower that belonged to a man who led a group of bandits. The tower was filled with all kinds of shady people, but there was no real organization. The tower was mostly used as a hangout for drug/alcohol abuse, gambling, etc.

The players needed to not draw attention to themselves so they worked their way up slowly - room by room - pretending to be drunk sometimes, other times having to knock some peoples heads together but stealth was key. When they reached the top, and the leaders room (where they were to snag an amulet from him) they were caught... the room slowly filled with his men as he entered. They were surrounded.

Expecting a fight, they prepared to roll init when the leader of the group spoke to them asking them what they were doing here. They told him the truth. So he GIVES them the amulet... "and you know what... take these as well" and proceeds to give them a bunch of his belongings (a treasure parcel basically). He then tells his men (who now want to kill the PC's and are saying as much) "No no, we are going to let them have this treasure... not only that, but they are now going to leave here, and no harm is to come to them... but they, in turn, will tell their people that they killed me in the process" - and so they walked out without a fight and instead had a cool RP encounter there with them.

This kind of sets the tone I think too - after this encounter, there was more consideration for those who gave up in combat - they also thought more about ways to avoid combat.


With all that said, I go back to the players as was also mentioned above. I hand selected mine for what I knew would be a combat-lite (for 4e standards) campaign. They knew up front that 1) combat will be tough 2) PC death is not something that bothers me as long as i feel the combats are MOSTLY balanced (leaning towards tough as I mentioned) - in other words, watch your ass because i wont pull punches and i roll out in front of everyone, and 3) there might be multiple games without combat. Knowing those up front helps.


Anyway, just some quick thoughts on my way to bed - sorry for the length

 

[LostSoul]

My big incentive (besides meeting some new players) was to try out my quest-based XP only idea.

I was wondering when people would start doing that - it seems like the easiest hack to make to the game.

I'd probably let the players write their own quests.

*

If they really want to fight, let them fight and play up the consequences. Do your best to make them aware of the consequences and let it play out. Don't be afraid to throw game-world appropriate encounters at them.

It was their choice to get into the fight, after all.

 

[amerigoV]

Furthermore, the players were eager to talk to NPCs in town before they struck out, since they hoped to discover more quest objectives and thus get more XP. For example... The head of the town guard was a dwarf, and he offered a bounty on any dwarven-crafted items they recovered. That was the first time in almost 20 years of DMing that I've had a table clamoring to explore the town and talk to NPCs.

....

Although a quest XP system sounds interesting, has anybody else had success with that sort of thing?

Its too video-gamey for me - just smacks of WOW - you know, all those NPCs wandering around with ! and ? over their heads...

Just kidding - had to throw it out there.

I use Savage Worlds - it does something a bit different. It allocates XP per session based on progress, but not specific killing of things. A normal session gets you 2 xp, a especially productive session (wrap up a quest/milestone) you get 3xp. Every 5xp gets you an advance (~ getting a feat, some skill points, or attribute advance).

Upon switching, I too noticed that players were more willing to scout, plan, and decide if the old "kick in the door" approach was worth it. They still enjoy combat, but they are more willing to let a patrol pass by vs. ambush them.

 

[KidSnide]

Thanks guys. Some good ideas, but alas, I've tried most of them before with little success. Although a quest XP system sounds interesting, has anybody else had success with that sort of thing?

Lots of folks (myself included) have stopped giving xp for combat and just reward levels "when appropriate". I think it's been really successful in my case (my current campaign has been going on for a decade without xp), although I'm not sure how much of an effect it had on behavior. My PCs were already focused on engaging the story (or, "the things going on in the word" if you take a less guided view of the game).

Certainly, I would recommend rewarding accomplishment over battle, if just as a way to focus your players on the effect on the game world. But if you're still tracking xp, make sure there is enough story xp in the world to make up for the amount of combat xp you take out. (Otherwise, a "story focus" could be seen as just a different word for "less xp", and your players might get upset.)

-KS

 

[Nebulous]

I don't use XP at all, haven't for years. For my style of game, it takes player's focus completely away from the "numbers" needed to level up and focuses more on story. More so, i try to introduce interesting NPCs they don't necessarily want to kill, or put them in delicate situations so friggin' dangerous that to start wantonly killing would lead to their own destruction. So they have to pick their fights carefully. This is a very different approach than the default WotC method in the H/P/E series to "kick in the door" and obliterate whatever you see.

 

[ExploderWizard]

If your players only find fun during combat encounters then there isn't much you can do. Changing the rewards only helps if the players like reaping the greatest rewards more than anything including combat. Sometimes playstyles are so incompatible that you either accept the players as they are or find new players.

 

[nightwyrm]

Sometimes, you just need to know what your players want out of your game. Are your sessions hours long weekend sessions where players want to be fully immerse in the setting, or are the sessions weekday, after work sessions where they just want to drink beer and roll dice.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Here is a situation on my hex map:

<hijack> Just wanted to say, good stuff here. </hijack>

 

[ggroy]

If your players only find fun during combat encounters then there isn't much you can do. Changing the rewards only helps if the players like reaping the greatest rewards more than anything including combat. Sometimes playstyles are so incompatible that you either accept the players as they are or find new players.

In the past when I was putting games together, I usually tried to look for players with similar aims and motivations. For example, if I only found powergamers so far, I'll usually look for other powergamers to complete the party. If I have only found thespian types, then I'll look for other thespian types to complete the party. If I have only found casual beer and pretzels player types, then I'll find others casual beer and pretzels types who are interested in playing games to let off some steam.

In my experience, most powergamers I've gamed with have very little to no tolerance for thespian types. More "serious" gamers (whether powergamer or thespian), tend by annoyed easily by casual beer and pretzels player types.

In general, I'll try to find players which are compatible with one another's playstyles. It may take longer to put together a game, but it is worthwhile for games which are longer term (ie. lasting more than a month, with weekly sessions).

 

[Crothian]

Don't punish the players for doing what they want to do and what the game wants them to do. Talk to them out of game. Explain what you want out of the game and deal with it between adults.