Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9419259" data-attributes="member: 42582">Is that the only way to gain XP? (In Torchbearer, there are no XP in the most literal sense, but there is level advancement based on spending Fate and Persona, and these are acquired by reference to Belief and Goal, plus to a lesser extent Instinct and Creed, in the way I've described upthread.)I ask, because that might influence how you handle the "disadvantage" XP: are they the mainstay, or more of a bonus?In my earlier post I also mentioned simple obstacles. I want to say a little bit more about those. In Torchbearer and Burning Wheel, every obstacle will generate a check. (There's an exception that relates to pacing and thematic focus, but I'll ignore it for the moment - let's suppose all the obstacles are thematically on-point, like they seem to be in your example.)Even if it's very easy, it still triggers a check - eg moving the materials from A to B to stop them being used by the villain might be an Ob 1 Labourer test. And the dice pool system (roll your pool of d6s, with every 4+ being a success) means that failure is always possible (if unlikely) even on the easiest task.When a failure happens, the GM has to bring in a consequence - a change to the fictional situation, that speaks in some fashion to someone's Goals and/or Beliefs. This means that, even in rather instrumental action declarations, the thematic/character-development "weight" is still sitting there on the scales. This is a big part of how the quest to rid the temple and catacombs of undead also promises and produces thematic development. (Another part of the engine is that, parallel to level gain in Torchbearer, there is a system for skill improvement that requires both failure and successes; and Burning Wheel has something similar though not identical; which means that players don't always hate the risk of failing on their rolls.)A simple example: a PC had been cursed by a gem, to obsessively crave and protect it ("my precious") - mechanically, this meant writing a Belief about keeping the gem safe from theft etc. The PC was out shopping with Golin (the Dwarf PC) and Golin's new friend Gerda, whom he had recruited from some bandits the PCs had encountered not long before.The Resources test to purchase whatever it was they were after failed, and so the vendor wouldn't sell, and then (the GM-imposed consequence) when the gem-cursed PC got back to her rooms she found her gem had been stolen! At first she assumed it had been stolen by her enemy Megloss, but once that was cleared up (via social interaction with Megloss) then she realised it was Gerda. (Which also made sense from a meta-perspective, as she was the only named character other than the two PCs present in the shopping scene.)So even the simple, most instrumental obstacle - can I persuade this person to sell me the <whatever it was> - produced this character-relevant situation, of Golin's friend Gerda having stolen, and herself become obsessed by, the other PC's cursed Elfstone..I don't think D&D's approach to resolving actions, and especially to determining the consequences of failure, always makes it so easy to keep the focus on these things that the players are bringing to the front and centre of the fiction, because they tend to encourage consequences to be narrated in terms of the immediate physical environment rather than the "thematic" environment that is surrounding the characters.4e skill challenges are an exception here (or can be). I saw in your post that you're using social skill challenges: if you're wanting to increase the character discovery/development aspect in play; and if you're currently not using failures in skill challenges, and the reframings that they produce, to do that; then I'd suggest maybe giving it a try.</blockquote>

Verification