Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Serenity Roleplaying Game
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="buzz" data-source="post: 3458818" data-attributes="member: 6777"><p>I don't agree.</p><p></p><p></p><p>First off, you should be aware that, according to the rulebook, the players aren't supposed to actually acknowledge that Plot Points exist. The book literally says that you should not say "I spend three Plot Points." You say, "I shoot the guy in the face," then had the GM some tokens and wink. A nod to immersion, I guess. </p><p></p><p>On top of this, the rules also specifically say that the GM can ignore Plot Points. It gives an example of Kaylee spending points (nod, wink) to use an Asset she paid for during chargen. The GM, seeing that this will derail his plot, hands the tokens back to her player and tells her she can't do it.</p><p></p><p>This whole issue of trust you're bringing up is beside the point, I think. Trust or no, there is nothing in the system that requires the GM to do anything with your Complications. I mean, we've done exactly what you're saying above. More than one player has said, e.g., "Well due to my [Complication X], I do this..." And nothing happens. It's a mother-may-I.</p><p></p><p>The game blows when the Plot Points are not flowing. Unfortunately, there's nothing in the system that forces them to flow.</p><p></p><p>As a player, I don't think that I should have to be asking the GM, "Hey, could you use the system please?" The system should just make it happen. That way, the whole game doesn't sink or swim based on whether the GM is awesome. The awesome can be spread around the table.</p><p></p><p></p><p>We do. I'm saying it'd be cool if there was some system reinforcement instead of having to resort to a bargaining process... a process that the book advises shouldn't even be allowed, effectively.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm not really sure what you're talking about here. I'm just trying to give an example of how to make things less passive and more active for both sides. </p><p></p><p>If you want a mainstream, non-indie example, look at <em>Mutants & Masterminds</em>. Complications exist in that game to both create adversity and give PCs Hero Points. They're not a mother-may-I where the player raises their hand and hopes the GM calls on them. They're flags that tell the GM how players want to earn their Hero Points; "If you invoke this, you give me X points."</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="buzz, post: 3458818, member: 6777"] I don't agree. First off, you should be aware that, according to the rulebook, the players aren't supposed to actually acknowledge that Plot Points exist. The book literally says that you should not say "I spend three Plot Points." You say, "I shoot the guy in the face," then had the GM some tokens and wink. A nod to immersion, I guess. On top of this, the rules also specifically say that the GM can ignore Plot Points. It gives an example of Kaylee spending points (nod, wink) to use an Asset she paid for during chargen. The GM, seeing that this will derail his plot, hands the tokens back to her player and tells her she can't do it. This whole issue of trust you're bringing up is beside the point, I think. Trust or no, there is nothing in the system that requires the GM to do anything with your Complications. I mean, we've done exactly what you're saying above. More than one player has said, e.g., "Well due to my [Complication X], I do this..." And nothing happens. It's a mother-may-I. The game blows when the Plot Points are not flowing. Unfortunately, there's nothing in the system that forces them to flow. As a player, I don't think that I should have to be asking the GM, "Hey, could you use the system please?" The system should just make it happen. That way, the whole game doesn't sink or swim based on whether the GM is awesome. The awesome can be spread around the table. We do. I'm saying it'd be cool if there was some system reinforcement instead of having to resort to a bargaining process... a process that the book advises shouldn't even be allowed, effectively. I'm not really sure what you're talking about here. I'm just trying to give an example of how to make things less passive and more active for both sides. If you want a mainstream, non-indie example, look at [I]Mutants & Masterminds[/I]. Complications exist in that game to both create adversity and give PCs Hero Points. They're not a mother-may-I where the player raises their hand and hopes the GM calls on them. They're flags that tell the GM how players want to earn their Hero Points; "If you invoke this, you give me X points." [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Serenity Roleplaying Game
Top