Rewarding Roleplaying

[I'm A Banana]

"This benefit is meaningless without mechanics!"? Hm, I'm not sure I agree. On the one hand, if the 'game' is the dice, then that makes sense.

On the other hand, if the DM describes my Thief being called to adventure from his velvet-cushioned, concubine-appointed boudoir, that certainly feels different - and preferable - than being shaken awake in a stinking gutter. The boudoir doesn't give any mechanical benefit in combat, but from the POV of my Thief it's a more important reward than another '+' on his magic dagger.

It doesn't replace the + on his dagger, though. You can slap it on top, but you still need the dagger's +.

Yeah, it's potentially interesting story material. But that's down to individual DMs and players, really. It's only valuable if you make room for it to be valuable.

Because it's fluff, it's also something you can have from level 1. My dwarf bard is always called to adventure from his velvet-cushioned, concubine-appointed boudoir. The fact that your thief isn't is an intentional choice for you to define your character (and their desires) in that way.

Now, if 4e had a system like a lot of more narrative games do -- one in which your character's desire plays a central role in how you grow and change over the course the campaign -- that would be a slightly different story. Suddenly, your thief's boudoir and my dwarf's ability to break the cycle of poverty and bigotry in the world become things with a mechanical weight (even if it's just XP, though it could be more than just XP).

But the game doesn't care much what your desire is. It assumes you have one, probably, and a DM will, probably, help you achieve it, via violence done to monsters with + daggers. That's all free-form, though, so it doesn't actually feel much like a reward if you can have it if you want it anyway. Your thief achieving his boudoir -- that my dwarf has had all along -- is rather hollow, since you could have just chosen to get it at almost any point.

 

[Matt James]

In 4e, not really. These kinds of rewards kind of need a system to support them. 4e revolves around combat quite centrally, and so giving someone, say, a squire that wants to help them (but is useless in a fight) is not a reward that is valuable.

I can't say that I agree with this completely. I've had several groups that don't value combat in the ways you describe. Rewards do not have to always present as a mechanical enhancer.

 

[the Jester]

I like having a system to reward rp with xp, but am not currently using one.

I've experimented with a lot of different approaches. I have found a number that really worked for me at various points.

 

[Delgar]

I guess it really depends on the players/group, but I stopped tracking XP years ago. And this system works great for us. I just tell them to level up when I feel they have hit a point where it makes senes. Sometimes this is before and sometimes after they would level up if I tracked xp. It's always at the end of an adventure or storyline, or in a point of downtime.

And although my players love getting phat lewt, they love getting other rewards, making powerful friends and enemies, and plotting big things.

As far as roleplaying goes, I think the tone is usually set by the DM. If you present them with interesting NPC's, intersting choices, and intriguing storylines the combat can almost become secondary in any system.

Right now one of my players compared the game I'm running to the TV show "Lost", where there are a series of open threads involving each of the characters and everytime one question gets answered another two questions arise. They can't wait to get in there and uravel the mystery.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I can't say that I agree with this completely. I've had several groups that don't value combat in the ways you describe. Rewards do not have to always present as a mechanical enhancer.

Like I said to S'mon, its still potentially valuable story material. But story material is ultimately...fluff...in the game. It doesn't matter in play. I could give my paladin a squire, or my paladin might have a squire from Day 1, or my paladin might not care about a squire, and either way, it all works the same. It doesn't cause any different play when it comes down to it -- there's nothing about what my paladin does that the squire comes into play for.

There's no sense of achievement or advancement or reward for this, inherently. If you're fond of the story material to begin with, you'll enjoy gaining things your character desires, but there's also no motive for your character to desire anything, really.

Which is why I referenced the more narrative systems above. D&D characters are not defined by their desires (well, gold and power perhaps?), but they could be, and that would help tie those story elements to actual rewards and progress, rather than just being extra DM work that gets an offhand reference in play but doesn't actually affect much.

 

[Blue]

I use chips for awesomeness. Physical poker chips, put out a few piles around the table. And when a player does something particularly in character, particularly cool (regardless if it works), comes up with a clue everyone else overlooked, and other things like this, ANYONE can give them a chip.

Yes, some people average more. But what I've seen is that the people getting less are encouraged to do more to get more.

EVERYONE giving out I think is a real key. People want those accolades of a bunch of their friends each grabbing a chip and tossing it to them. And some have been for the most boneheaded - but in-character - actions. Other times it's been for audacious plans to save the day with much risk, or even for a perfectly (RP) description of an action in a deciding combat .

It also helps for things like if the part splits, folks can get chips for side RP even if I'm focusing on different players. I also give chips for adding to the campaign wiki, writing stories and backgrounds, etc.

In the end it's shares of a XP pool, so I control the total amount I want going out to the group. Oh, and the excel sheet behind the scenes awards two extra chips for showing up, so everyone gets a share even on an off night. Well, actually, that's how it started (back in 3.0), but it metamorphed since.

 

[Akaiku]

There's no sense of achievement or advancement or reward for this, inherently. If you're fond of the story material to begin with, you'll enjoy gaining things your character desires, but there's also no motive for your character to desire anything, really.

It seems like you are saying that fluff doesn't matter at all.

Which, in a particular light is true, but...

In my experience, I've not ever ran across someone playing dnd who's there entirely for the mechanical idea. I've never seen the player who'd be fine with their character being a large rat using rat-based power 1 through 37 vs different rat foes in an attempt to unlock rat-based power 38. This can be done with dnd without adjusting any mechanics.

 

[I'm A Banana]

In my experience, I've not ever ran across someone playing dnd who's there entirely for the mechanical idea. I've never seen the player who'd be fine with their character being a large rat using rat-based power 1 through 37 vs different rat foes in an attempt to unlock rat-based power 38. This can be done with dnd without adjusting any mechanics.

There's quite a few kick-in-the-door, lets-kill-some-goblins, get-me-to-the-next-fight players out there for whom the fluff of their abilities is largely incidental to rolling dice and strategic combat. And there's also quite a few people who would recognize the story reward for vapor, even if they're not all about the numbers.

Not everyone's like that, and story rewards can be valuable for the right player, but even the right player would probably feel shafted if they got these rewards instead of another + to their dagger.

Now, it would be a different story if there were, say, add-on rules for robust social hierarchy play, where gold and land and hirelings and titles and lineages all added up to you increasing your social standing from 1st level "beggar" through 30th level "Beloved Supreme Ruler of All The Worlds", and you could fight and jockey for societal position in "social events" where you can use powers like "Shun Them At The Party" to hurt your rivals, and where your squire comes in handy since she gives you an equipment bonus to your Charisma rolls for the event, since she is good at polishing your armor and keeping your horse healthy, and that makes you impressive to the arrogant nobles at the event. A squire, or a brothel, or land, or a title -- those story rewards would certainly come in handy!

Without anything like that, though, it's story for story's sake. Which can be valuable, but can also be pointless. As a Lazy DM, I try to avoid preparing things which no one will care about, since that's a lot of wasted work. So that's why I don't use story rewards like that. I don't treat them as rewards. If they saved the village from orcs, the villagers are happy to see them and honor and respect them, but that's not a reward, that's just how the story developed, since they saved the town from orcs. They don't get anything from it. It's just fluff. And so I can feel free to also take it away when they fail to save the town from demons later on.

That's why I don't use story rewards, really. Though I certainly can see the potential for them, even without a robust social hierarchy system. Something as simple as having a player tell me what their character wants would help me to sprinkle some fluff in with my treasure, and know that it would be useful and wanted. Which certainly beats giving an uninterested paladin a squire that they could care less about.

 

[Matt James]

But story material is ultimately...fluff...in the game. It doesn't matter in play.

I'm not trying to single you out, Kamikaze, but you bring up some interesting points. In reference to the quote here, story material is the center of my campaigns and absolutely matters in play. Depending on the actions of the players, outcomes can affect how difficult things are going to be moving forward. As an example, if my players make poor decisions and go romping around a city, they could bring on unintended consequences. This is apart of the meta-system of the game. I don't have it codified, but it's there. They have to think hard about the consequences of their character's actions, else they inflict pain on themselves. There is no mechanic that governs this per se yet it affects them all the same.

This is only a single example, but I think it illustrates how story material (as you put it) can affect play.

 

[I'm A Banana]

In reference to the quote here, story material is the center of my campaigns and absolutely matters in play. As an example, if my players make poor decisions and go romping around a city, they could bring on unintended consequences. This is apart of the meta-system of the game. I don't have it codified, but it's there. They have to think hard about the consequences of their character's actions, else they inflict pain on themselves. There is no mechanic that governs this per se yet it affects them all the same.

This is only a single example, but I think it illustrates how story material (as you put it) can affect play.

I think I understand what you're driving at, but do you have a more concrete example? It might help me see what you're talking about a little more clearly.

From where I'm sitting, it seems pretty obvious to say "character decisions affect play." Characters choose left or right at the junction, choose Power A or Power B to use, choose to rest or not, choose to stay or run, choose to goof around in a tavern, or go fight the orc hoard on the borders...stuff like that. But all that stuff, when it affects play, comes to bear on the combat system, ultimately. How hard or easy is this, the next, or the last combat going to be? Do we fight the orcs far away, or do we fight them in the town? Do we fight them when we are well-prepared, or do we fight them when they've got the edge?

And from a more practical concern, on a more meta level, it seems like the players take the DM's "plans" into account. If the DM has the battlemat for the Orc Encampment sitting behind him, do we really want him to improvise a town map on the spur of the moment? It probably won't be as fun to fight something the DM had to ass-pull at the last moment...

It seems less clear to me that a story reward -- giving a character, say, knighthood -- necessarily affects play. It doesn't really matter in D&D if I'm Cuthbert or Saint Cuthbert, I'm still going to have to go into that dungeon and kill that dragon, and the "saint" isn't going to help me do it any faster.

It can still be valuable for someone who seeks it out those story features, of course. If someone is explicitly like, "Hey, DM, my rogue wants to live a rich life among the wealthy, not this guttersnipe existence he's so used to!", then adding flourishes like a room full of concubines is a good way to make that player happy. But that room isn't going to matter when you go back into the dungeon and try to kill the dragon, and it's not something that is any more important than how a DM describes how the orc dies when it hits 0 hp. It's also something that rogue could've had from the get-go, just by saying "My rogue spends all her gold on luxurious inn rooms and hired lovers, so she is already in her paradise."

I'm a lazy DM, so I'm naturally going to focus on what the system already supports. Since there's no real effect to giving out squires and titles and land grants and princess wives and whatnot, I don't generally give them out, unless it's clear that the player wants these little flourishes. And in that case, I don't consider them rewards, really. Just descriptions. Instead of "You find 1,000 gold pieces," I say, "You find a deed to land that is probably worth about 1,000 gold pieces." My job's done at that point, either way.