Sweet20 Experience Rules Discussion.

[SweeneyTodd]

Sorry again for posting so much. If this doesn't interest you, please just skip it.

This is Vincent Baker's description of GNS, from the link above. Keep in mind that Keys could be used as a tool to "Say Something"; that's how it's relevant.

So you have some people sitting around and talking. Some of the things they say are about fictional characters in a fictional world. During the conversation the characters and their world aren't static: the people don't simply describe them in increasing detail, they (also) have them do things and interact. They create situations - dynamic arrangements of characters and setting elements - and resolve them into new situations.

They may or may not have formal procedures for this part of the conversation, but the simple fact that it consistently happens reveals some sort of structure. If they didn't have an effective way to negotiate the evolution of situation to situation, their conversation would stall or crash.

Why are they doing this? What do they get out of it? For now, let's limit ourselves to three possibilities: they want to Say Something (in a lit 101 sense), they want to Prove Themselves, or they want to Be There. What they want to say, in what way they want to prove themselves, or where precisely they want to be varies to the particular person in the particular moment. Are there other possibilities? Maybe. Certainly these three cover an enormous variety, especially as their nuanced particulars combine in an actual group of people in actual play.

Over time, that is, over many many in-game situations, play will either fulfill the players' creative agendas or fail to fulfill them. Do they have that discussion? Do they prove themselves or let themselves down? Are they "there"?

 

[LostSoul]

I really like how this system will expose, by virtue of xp totals, who's getting more screen time. That's not something you can do with the CR system. If your Ranger has a Key of "Defeat Favoured Enemies" and isn't getting much XP for it (in relation to the other PCs), the DM will know to throw more in there. That wouldn't be so obvious using the CR system.

I'll post what some of my players said of the key system:

I would try to see if I could get Rob to "try it out, just once. If you don't like it, we'll do something different." (I wonder if you could use Keys for some PCs and the regular CR/XP chart for others in the same game?)

I'd tell Tom that bookeeping should be simple. Whenever you use your Key (ie. get xp for it), put a + beside that key. If you go against it, put a -. At the end of the game, add them up. (I guess you'd need other signs for big uses, like maybe a + in a box or a *.)

And I'd tell Tom and Ted to trust me.

 

[genshou]

I really like how this system will expose, by virtue of xp totals, who's getting more screen time. That's not something you can do with the CR system. If your Ranger has a Key of "Defeat Favoured Enemies" and isn't getting much XP for it (in relation to the other PCs), the DM will know to throw more in there. That wouldn't be so obvious using the CR system.

It does seem to do a good job of revealing that. I've decided to use it but conform the numbers to the standard D&D scale (as I still have to account for item creation XP costs). Each point of Sweet20 XP would translate to the XP value of one CR-appropriate encounter, that value being 75 xp per level.

I would try to see if I could get Rob to "try it out, just once. If you don't like it, we'll do something different." (I wonder if you could use Keys for some PCs and the regular CR/XP chart for others in the same game?)

I'd tell Tom that bookeeping should be simple. Whenever you use your Key (ie. get xp for it), put a + beside that key. If you go against it, put a -. At the end of the game, add them up. (I guess you'd need other signs for big uses, like maybe a + in a box or a *.)

And I'd tell Tom and Ted to trust me.

Try to convince your players (especially Rob) to try it out, as LostSoul suggested. If they don't like it, just go back and assign them the appropriate XP as you normally would have during the test session(s). But really, they should try it first and condemn it second.

 

[RangerWickett]

But really, they should try it first and condemn it second.

I don't agree. I wanted to know what they thought would be the problems of such a system, and they raise some good points. I don't see any problem with my current system (the whole group levels when I feel like it), but I saw potential in this new system.

This is still an interesting discussion, though.

 

[LostSoul]

I think you should give it a shot, RW. Or maybe try another game for a one-off, Dogs in the Vineyard. At worst, you could have a somewhat unsatisfactory session; at best, it could open up a whole new world of role-playing. The risk-benefit analysis is in favour of trying it out.

 

[ResurectedLlama]

I really like this system because it helps define charcters more as well as keeping the numbers down. I am definately going to use it in my fate based D20 past game.

 

[genshou]

I don't agree. I wanted to know what they thought would be the problems of such a system, and they raise some good points. I don't see any problem with my current system (the whole group levels when I feel like it), but I saw potential in this new system.

This is still an interesting discussion, though.

Sure it's good to know what they think, but just try playing out the session the Sweet20 way once, and if it doesn't work you can just give them XP for that session as you normally would. No harm done.

 

[Kemrain]

So I showed this system to my GM and the other player of our small game, and they both liked a lot about it. Not everything, but we had a long fight talk about it and we've come up with a few modifications that leave everyone pretty happy. In the interest of discussion, and writing down the rules so we don't forget them, I'll post them here. Please feel free to steal, modify, or ignore this contrabution.


We've broken the two types of Keys, Motivation and Everything Else, into Minor and Major Keys, respectively. (Mostly because Everything Else is a lame name that isn't descriptive- no offense to the origional namer. Our names are subject to change, but this is an easy way to differentiate and know how much XP they give.) One thing can be either a Major or Minor Key, depending on it's importance to the story and character. The only real difference between the two is how much XP they give and under what circomstances.

Minor Keys are things like Key of Bloodlust or Key of the Masochist. They function as they do normally, except that they give 1 or 2 XP, for a minor or major achievement, not 1 and 3. Minor Keys are very open ended, based around a behavior or activity that is tied to the motivation of the character, but usually not the plot of the story. These Keys usually effect the character more than they effect the world.

Major Keys, such as Key of Vengeance or Key of Conscience, remain as normal, save now they give 1, 3, and 5 XP for the varying levels of difficulty. Major Keys are usually tied to the plot of the game more than the individual character. These Keys are usually tied more to the world than the character, effecting others as much or more than the PC.

Counters have been changed to be more like the Buyoffs of the origional Key System. They never cause you to lose XP, and if you act against a Key you have the option of effectively selling the Key in exchange for XP. (We're using 7 for the moment, but it has been suggested that Major and Minor Keys should have a different XP exchange rate.) Keys that have been sold cannot be repurchased without GM permission, and even if they are, it will be at a loss (see below).

You recieve 3 Major Keys and 4 Minor Keys at character creation, and gain no Keys automaticly with level. You must purchase additional Keys with XP. (We're using 10 for the moment, but it has been suggested that Major and Minor Keys should be priced differently, and that buying a Key should always be more expensive than selling a Key.)

It takes 100 XP to progress to the next level.

We also changed the naming format, so that, for instance, Key of Vengeance becomes Key of the Vengeful. This was done for asthetic reasons only, because my GM liked it that way. (Hooray for small meaningless victories!)

So far, we actually have yet to play under this system, but that should change this weekend. The numbers are a guess at this point, and they will be changed once we start playing and see how the balances lie. All three of us are open to changes and are looking forward to seeing how things go. We want to have about 6 months of realtime between levels, with 1-3 6+ hour game sessions per week. We may need to up the number of XP required, but that won't be a problem at all. We're excited about this system (we haven't gotten ANY XP in 11 months, you're DAMN RIGHT we're excited!) and are looking forward to testing its limits.

- Kemrain the Hopefully 10th Level Soon.

 

[LostSoul]

One thing can be either a Major or Minor Key, depending on it's importance to the story and character.

My personal view is that all Keys are important to the character (and therefore the player - or maybe the other way around). The Keys aren't important to the story, they are the story. Which is to say that the story comes about from the choices the players make from the conflicts the GM hands them. Those conflicts are always derived from the Keys.

If you're playing and you don't like (or aren't interested in) one of your Keys, you should be able to say, "I don't want to focus on this, let's focus on this other Key." And that's how you create the story.

I don't think that all Keys will be as important to the player or the character though. Vengance might be the main Key, and Guardian might be a lesser one. The player would have to communicate which Keys are more important to him. (I wonder if there'd be a way to handle that in the game? Player-invoked Keys?)

edit: Let us all know how it goes! I'm hoping to use this for d20 Star Wars, with some Force-stuff in there as well.

 

[Kemrain]

While I'm inclined to agree with you, that all keys are important to the character, I think having some that are consitered to be more important doesn't hurt at all. To be honest, I've been kicking around a way to upgrade a minor key to a major key in my head. the real difference between the two Key types is what triggers them and how much XP they give. Minor Keys, like Key of Bloodlust (Key of the Warrior, as we call it) come up pretty often, and can occur more than once per session, where a Major Key, like Key of Vengeance (Key of the Vengeful) might come up more than once, but is unlikley to. In situations where you have 3 or 4 events that trigger a Major Key, the GM is likley to say that a few of them count as one towards a larger reward from the Key. Taking out those three Lieutenants by themselves isn't that big a deal, but the loss of three of the BBEG's best men in one day is striking a decisive blow, and is worth the 5 XP reward.

So, looking at this, the GM could assign XP as follows:

Three fights, one of them a tough solo kill, so 4 XP from Key of the Warrior (Two battles for one each and a difficult one for 2). Killed 3 of the BBEG's Lieutenants, who'd individually be worth 1 XP from Key of the Vengeful, but since the loss of the three happened so quickly and is a terrible defeat, it's worth 5 XP.

Then again, that's just how I see it. Maybe I'm doing it wrong. Who knows?

- Kemrain the Disclaimed.