What do you think about action points?

[Ambrus]

*Sprinkles catnip liberally around the thread* Here kitty kitty.

 

[Glyfair]

It becomes a contest of trying to meta-game the DC so you know when to use one, rather than use it to do something heroic.

I love hero points, but this is my issue with them as written.

I hate the metagaming aspect of gambling about whether you need to use them before you know the result of the check. Hero points are supposed to represent the "edge" the protagonists get in a fantasy story. A player wasting a point on a roll that was successful to begin with ruins the feel for my (conversely, I don't have a problem with heroes trying to use them for rolls that have no chance).

In my campaigns I tell the player's whether it's a success or failure before they need to make a decision about using hero points.

For the record, I feel the same about other similiar mechanics that require decisons about luck or fate before the success of a roll is known. Having a cleric of the god of luck use his "divine luck" to no effect (because it was working anyway) doesn't seem "lucky" to me.

 

[Umbran]

I recently instituted the UA version of action points in my game, and my players seem to like them a great deal. The die-roll bonus is only one of many possible uses for the points, so I don't think the limitations on that one use are a big deal.

 

[blargney the second]

The point of action points is to turn near misses into bare successes.

I recently made a table rule that when a player spends an action point, they get a little bonus XP if they describe the action in some suitably cinematic, heroic, or cool way. The side benefit is that it simultaneously allows me to add appropriate circumstance modifiers to their actions. I also let them know immediately after the action is resolved whether their APs made the difference between success and failure.

I've found they both value and use the APs a lot since implementing those changes.
-blarg

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

I prefer hero points: 1 per level to guarantee a success or guarantee an opponent's failure.

 

[molonel]

I'm running two games using the d20 Modern system, and I like them so much that I'm expanding their utility. It's like reaching for something and then ... THERE! Just getting it.

The metagaming aspect isn't that bad. When you roll really low, or midway, most times you don't bother.

 

[jdrakeh]

1. In a nutshell I think a d6 is paltry, especially at higher levels when your bonuses are really high.

2. I hate that they only recycle every level, thus not really facilitating the "pulp" action they we're created for in Eberron.

You've summed up my thoughts on the matter fairly well. In order for APs to inspire action and have a chance to create a "pulp" atmosphere, they need to:

A. Grant a more significant bonus, thus making cinematic actions more likely to succeed.

B. Refresh more frequently, thus making frequent cinematic actions possible.

 

[The_Gneech]

What do I think about them?

1) When I've tried to implement them, the players never use them.

2) I'd rather the bonus was 2d4 than 1d6 ... rolling a 1 after burning an action point usually won't turn the tide and just feels like a wasted effort.

-The Gneech

 

[Thaumaturge]

Here is a thread where Piratecat posts his action point system. It's about halfway down the second page.


Thaumaturge.

 

[molonel]

1) When I've tried to implement them, the players never use them.

I actually had the same problem when I started running d20 Modern. I got the players into the habit of using them by telling them I would reboot their action points at a particular level.

Now, they use them all the time.