WotC: Do NOT tie Action Points to level advancement!!!

[kerbarian]

I have been using the Arcana Evolved "Hero Points" (action points on steroids). In AE RAW, Hero Points are very rare to compensate for their power. I house ruled them to be have even more uses, and handed them out like candy--but I put a cap on the number that the player can have at one time. This change was directly intended to stop hoarding with a bunch of players that love to hoard, and it worked.

If the goals for APs are
* They can be used to help save your character's life
* They can be used to pull off dramatic/heroic actions
* Players actually use them for heroic actions and don't just hoard them for the life-saving uses

then we definitely need mechanics that actively fight hoarding. Yes, there are players who will go for the dramatic actions even if it means that it could risk their character's life later, but, IME, most won't. As many others have mentioned in this thread, characters will save their AP until either it looks like the character is in serious danger, or until the player can see the refresh coming and feels like he has enough left that he can burn through them without risking his character's life.

The mechanic you mention of handing them out frequently but placing a cap will definitely work. Players will probably still hover at or near their cap, but then they'll start using AP because they know that otherwise the points will be wasted. So players will spend AP about as fast as they come in, and then when the character is really in danger, or there's a climactic battle, they can dip into their reserve. Sounds good to me.

One of the keys is that the refreshes need to be frequent. Players will spend AP when they can see the refresh coming. The closer the refresh is, the more willing they'll be to spend points. Another key is adding to the pool of AP rather than resetting it. If you reset the pool every once in a while, players will try to burn through their entire reserve right before the reset, which doesn't make much story sense -- why would characters go super-heroic at seemingly random intervals? If you're always adding to the pool (and if the amount you're adding each time is small relative to the cap), there's no mechanics-induced desire to burn through it all at once.

However, as has also been mentioned in this thread, I'd expect 4e to have very objective rules about when AP are awarded, rather than relying on DM whim. The obvious options for when to award AP are:

Per level: The big problem here is that it's not frequent, which results in hoarding.
Per session: Could work -- I don't see any major problems.
Per day: Frequency is okay, but it means that characters could sit around for a few days to recharge AP. Doesn't seem like a good side-effect.
Per encounter: Very frequent, but it also has weird side-effects like, "Thog is low on AP. He'll go to the tavern and start a bar fight. That's an encounter, right?"

The issue with per-day and per-encounter awards of AP is that it allows the characters to take actions that let them stock up on AP. One way to address that is to not allow saving up of AP at all. It might not work per-day, since AP would then become a per-day resource like 3e spells, possibly shifting things back towards the 5-minute work day.

Granting AP per encounter that can't be saved up could work, though. Players can feel confident about the scope of the current encounter, so they won't feel like they need to hoard AP until the end of it. One possible issue is that it means the PCs will be equally heroic in every encounter, rather than pulling out all the stops for the big, final battle. Of course, that's saying that characters *should* have a reserve of AP that they're hoarding for big events. That could be handled by having a reserve pool of AP (possibly even refreshing per level), plus granting a small number of AP each encounter that are lost if they're not used by the end of the encounter.

So, a couple options that seem reasonable:

1) Grant some number of AP every session that characters can save up, up to a cap. e.g. 3 AP/session, with a cap of 15 AP.

2) Grant some number of AP every encounter, and those AP are lost if they're not used during the encounter. In addition, have a reserve pool of AP that's refreshed more slowly (perhaps per level).

 

[Jhaelen]

I have found that the opposite is true in Spycraft 2.0 games, for example. Since APs are per session, PCs feel much better about spending them and trying to perform cool stunts. The game is much more fun and active.

I definitely like the concept of Action Points and I am pretty happy I introduced them in my campaign.

But it's true that there are some side-effects that might be lessened by using APs per session rather than per level.
Most of my players use their APs pretty regularly and only start to become more miserly when there's only one or two left. A minority seems to prefer hoarding them, which leads to odd behaviour if the characters are close to level-up:

They suddenly start using action points in every round.

But maybe that's more a flaw of me granting xp for an encounter right after combat than the APs refreshing after level-up rule.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

I'd prefer they didn't force an action point mechanic on the game.

That said, how often depends entirely on the mechanic. The last campaign I ran used a 1 per level "hero point" acculumation mechanic that worked fine and was balanced at 1 per level ... but they were quite powerful (spending one was the equivalent of a guaranteed success on a dice roll). I wouldn't want to see per day or per encounter mechanics unless all they were was bonus dice or re-rolls.

I used them primarily to offset the lethality of the campaign: occasional set-piece encounters plus my own rolling in the open = no room for gudging if the players decide to try something silly. I wouldn't say they belong in every campaign. Some players hoarded them, other spent them at every opportunity but it generally worked out OK. I probably encouraged good behaviour by allowing a player to spend a hero point on another character's behalf, so in an emergency the hoarder could save the day.

Edit: just reached that point in the podcast, and they clearly say they aren't Eberron or SW action points ... they are entirely new and better.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

One of the keys is that the refreshes need to be frequent. Players will spend AP when they can see the refresh coming. The closer the refresh is, the more willing they'll be to spend points. Another key is adding to the pool of AP rather than resetting it. If you reset the pool every once in a while, players will try to burn through their entire reserve right before the reset, which doesn't make much story sense -- why would characters go super-heroic at seemingly random intervals? If you're always adding to the pool (and if the amount you're adding each time is small relative to the cap), there's no mechanics-induced desire to burn through it all at once.

Exacty right.

However, in your subsequent analysis, you hinted at one key option, without coming out and listing it: Give AP in more than one way, and at least one of them should be semi-unpredictable. For example, I give AP at the end every adventure (along with XP). I also give them at the end of any session that seems to have had a lot of activity in it (reloading for next session). I also hand out a few for appropriate actions. In 4E terms, you could easily codify an adventure reward into something expected. You get the XP, you get some AP too. These the players can expect, even if the GM is stingy. The per session stuff is GM Fiat, but the players have a pretty good guess what will happen. The "appropriate action" is almost pure GM Fiat. The overall effect is that the players want to hover enough under their cap that they aren't wasting a horde of AP.

I do think another nice side effect of having an AP cap separate from the awarding of AP is that it encourages the designers to handle the "we don't need no stinking AP" games. Or similar, the "GM is such a stingy rat that we might as well not have them" games. The AP award becomes a dial, that the group can agree to roll up or down, but within design parameters than can be handled--"A 5th level group of characters will have somewhere between zero and X AP each, and if played as expected will likely have somewhere in the middle at the time they reach this encounter."

 

[Agamon]

Heh, I thought this thread was about adventure paths. I was wondering how one could not tie them to level advancement...

 

[Marshall]

I dont know what it was, but something set off an idea in my head. What if "action points" are the arbitrator of your per encounter abilities?

Say a 5th level character gains 3AP per encounter. He can spend those APs on generic AP benefits; rerolls, stabilizes, dice bonuses etc. or he can spend them to activate his "per encounter" class abilities. Cast a spell, activate a maneuver, change an aura and whatever else WotC comes up with per encounter. Sounds like a 'best of both worlds' scenario to me.

 

[pawsplay]

I dont know what it was, but something set off an idea in my head. What if "action points" are the arbitrator of your per encounter abilities?

Say a 5th level character gains 3AP per encounter. He can spend those APs on generic AP benefits; rerolls, stabilizes, dice bonuses etc. or he can spend them to activate his "per encounter" class abilities. Cast a spell, activate a maneuver, change an aura and whatever else WotC comes up with per encounter. Sounds like a 'best of both worlds' scenario to me.

Sounds like a "thing that didn't work very well in d20 Modern" scenario to me.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I saw the title and thought the OP meant "Adventure Paths" and was very confused.

 

[kerbarian]

I dont know what it was, but something set off an idea in my head. What if "action points" are the arbitrator of your per encounter abilities?

Say a 5th level character gains 3AP per encounter. He can spend those APs on generic AP benefits; rerolls, stabilizes, dice bonuses etc. or he can spend them to activate his "per encounter" class abilities. Cast a spell, activate a maneuver, change an aura and whatever else WotC comes up with per encounter. Sounds like a 'best of both worlds' scenario to me.

I think that would conflict with the stated design approach of siloing character abilities. If everything is fueled by AP, then you'd have to choose between spending your AP on, for example, a utility spell vs. a combat spell. You'd have one common resource, rather than an independent number of uses for each 'silo'.

 

[pawsplay]

I think that would conflict with the stated design approach of siloing character abilities. If everything is fueled by AP, then you'd have to choose between spending your AP on, for example, a utility spell vs. a combat spell. You'd have one common resource, rather than an independent number of uses for each 'silo'.

Maybe you spend an action point, use one blast energy, and tap your fireball spell.