D&D 5E The Case for Inspiration

[Yaarel]

Maybe, a particular action that strongly expresses a personality bond grants an extra action.

Maybe, a particular action that strongly expresses a flaw is at disadvantage, but if it fails your character immersion gets rewarded with a free action token that can be used at any time before the next rest.

 

[kelvan1138]

Hey buddy. I convinced the DM who's going to be running ToA to do this. Thank Tiamat he agreed. This is the best way to run it and I always enjoyed it in your games. Funny I find it's not the default and everyone dislike's Inspiration later.

 

[MNblockhead]

Our group doesn't like or use it. The consensus is, it trivializes the mini-game that is "maximizing advantage".

Why spend time creating a character able to achieve advantage? Why hone combos that enable advantage?

When inspiration simply allows you to have it whenever you feel like it?

I guess if the DM is very generous in how often inspiration is rewarded. You can only have one inspiration point at a time. If it is only used once per session, does it have that much of an impact that it makes character features meaningless?

Also, since it is part of the core RAW game, isn't it an ASPECT of the "mini-game that is 'maximizing advantage'"?

In additional to sub-class, proficiency, and feat selection, you would also want to make sure you select a background and traits, bonds, flaws that you are comfortable role-playing to increase your chance of inspiration.

My problem is that as written, it gives all the power to the GM. I can carefully craft my background and play it to the hilt, but if the DM doesn't notice or doesn't care, then I don't get that advantage. I find that in games run using inspiration RAW, either the players have to exaggerate how they player their characters--especially their flaws--or the DM doesn't notice. Either that, the DM will out of fairness just try to find an excuse to give out inspiration as early in the game as he can, to get it out of the way.

This is why I like the Angry DM's method. It keeps the background and personality choices meaningful while putting more control in the player's hands.

 

[Sleepy Walker]

I used to be a big fan of inspiration, but if the DM regularly forgets to hand it out it becomes problematic. Always seeing the carrot just out of reach and trying to get it eventually results in apathy for carrots.

Personally I have given up trying to get inspiration. I figure if I want power or a higher chance of success there are plenty of ways to achieve that where I do not have to rely on the DM to realize I should have it.

My personal opinion is that the DM should take a hard look at what they want to keep track of vs what they actually can keep track of. Chop the stuff off that they cannot keep track of, because half-a***** it will eventually reduce somebodies enjoyment just from the eventual realization that it was forgotten and improperly managed. Consistency is key in games.

 

[Gardens & Goblins]

I imagine in lower-stakes games or games in which there is often little consequence for failure on a roll, there's less impetus for wanting to have insurance against botched rolls.

Sure, or the table has ever played Call of Cthulhu for any length of time. Then its not matter of 'if' bad schnizzle is going to happen, but when. And how horrible. And everyone is dead. But that's technically a win. For now. Oh god..

 

[iserith]

I've tried and in my first campaign, it basically went unused for many of the reasons other have posted. It just wasn't very inspiring or fun, it felt like I was put into a position to have to reward players for playing their characters how I thought they should play them, and--mostly--I just never remembered to give it.

In my current Curse of Strahd game, I use a version of inspiration inspired by the Angry GM.

INSPIRATION = INSPIRED ACTION(inspired by the Angry GM)

Each session, each player will start with one inspiration token.

The token can be 'spent' to take an "inspired action."

When you take an Inspired Action, you can either gain advantage on an ability check, attack roll, or saving throw OR you can give advantage to someone else’s ability check, attack roll, or saving throw provided you are in a position to assist them directly in some way OR impose disadvantage on someone else’s ability check, attack roll, or saving throw provided you are in a position to hinder their action directly in some way. Whatever it is, the Inspired Action MUST somehow connect to one of your Personal Characteristics (traits, ideal, bond, or flaw).

After spending your inspiration token, you can get it back in the same session by Claiming a Setback. To Claim a Setback you must either impose disadvantage on one of your own ability checks, saving throws, or attack rolls based on one of your Personal Characteristics OR make a decision that creates a significant story setback, obstacle, or hindrance.

I've read and tried his house rule for Inspiration before and I find it a little hard for players to understand and implement. Certainly harder than the Players Claim Inspiration method I propose above which I prefer. I suppose it makes the players work a bit harder for Inspiration, but that's not really my goal. They work "hard enough" in my opinion with the Players Claim Inspiration method, and the hard limit of 4 per PC per session seems to work well. It doesn't seem to decrease the desire for players to make builds and take spells that also grant advantage in my experience as some seem to suggest.

 

[kelvan1138]

I guess if the DM is very generous in how often inspiration is rewarded. You can only have one inspiration point at a time. If it is only used once per session, does it have that much of an impact that it makes character features meaningless?

Also, since it is part of the core RAW game, isn't it an ASPECT of the "mini-game that is 'maximizing advantage'"?

In additional to sub-class, proficiency, and feat selection, you would also want to make sure you select a background and traits, bonds, flaws that you are comfortable role-playing to increase your chance of inspiration.

My problem is that as written, it gives all the power to the GM. I can carefully craft my background and play it to the hilt, but if the DM doesn't notice or doesn't care, then I don't get that advantage. I find that in games run using inspiration RAW, either the players have to exaggerate how they player their characters--especially their flaws--or the DM doesn't notice. Either that, the DM will out of fairness just try to find an excuse to give out inspiration as early in the game as he can, to get it out of the way.

This is why I like the Angry DM's method. It keeps the background and personality choices meaningful while putting more control in the player's hands.

That's the whole point of the alternate version of letting the player control it. They know their bonds, personality, alignment, flaws... Let them say when they've triggered inspiration. The GM just needs to give the ok, if they're the controlling type. Saves the GM head space for other GMing activities and lets the player have a little control.

 

[MNblockhead]

I've read and tried his house rule for Inspiration before and I find it a little hard for players to understand and implement. Certainly harder than the Players Claim Inspiration method I propose above which I prefer. I suppose it makes the players work a bit harder for Inspiration, but that's not really my goal. They work "hard enough" in my opinion with the Players Claim Inspiration method, and the hard limit of 4 per PC per session seems to work well. It doesn't seem to decrease the desire for players to make builds and take spells that also grant advantage in my experience as some seem to suggest.

I'll bring it up in my next game and see what my players think.

Your method would make my job even easier, so I don't have an issue with it.

The only change, I would make, I think, is limiting to once or twice per session. My sessions are 8 hours long with a solid 6, maybe 7, hours of actual gameplay. So a chance to claim inspiration once for every 3-4 hours of game time.

 

[iserith]

I'll bring it up in my next game and see what my players think.

Your method would make my job even easier, so I don't have an issue with it.

The only change, I would make, I think, is limiting to once or twice per session. My sessions are 8 hours long with a solid 6, maybe 7, hours of actual gameplay. So a chance to claim inspiration once for every 3-4 hours of game time.

For reference, my games (and my ToA DM @Valmarius' games) are 4 hours long and we both use this method. I find that I can reasonably claim Inspiration about twice on average, but that's largely because a couple of my character's personal characteristics are a little difficult to work into many scenes. Last session, I managed to hit them all, largely due to running into an NPC who was also an archaeologist, so I was able to touch on a couple of those hard-to-get characteristics during play. Other characters have characteristics that are easier to claim.

My favorite one is my flaw: "When I have a choice to go left or right, I always choose left." It comes up a lot in adventure locations, plus I use my bonus action Disengage or Dash (rogue) to position myself between two enemies in combat, then attack the one on the left after making a hilarious preamble about being forced to make a hard choice while everyone groans about what BS I'm spewing!

 

[Yaarel]

Whatever the benefits of playing out bonds and flaws, there must be player agency. Only the players remember what their bonds and flaws are, and only players know when their own character would do something. It has to be the player that mentions the intention to implement their bond or flaw.