Thursday, July 9, 2015

On my spend-xp-for-everything-DW-hack here you start off with a single move "Do something uncommon", perhaps...

On my spend-xp-for-everything-DW-hack here you start off with a single move "Do something uncommon", perhaps...

-- As you can use xp to either succeed right now, or to gain a bonus later (ie, you can use xp to increase Strength for all strength rolls, or to increase a result right now), two characters who have faces similar problems may be very different after the dungeon -- one now with Str+3, Con+3, the other with stats of zero.

This is the thing i like most. You decide if your experiences make you a badass, or get you out of a situation right now.

22 comments:

  1. Hmm. In a vacuum, this looks like it'd end up with those who have to spend XP just to get by having to do so more and more, whereas those who succeed keep on getting stronger and stronger.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Which I see as a virtue: oh shit moments really screw with budgeting. Of course, I also want loot to be a stat, and under the same principle: sirens right now for a success, or use xp to up the stat.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I've never liked having to choose between survival right now and long-term benefit when it comes to metagame currencies like XP. It sounds like what you want from the game as a whole, though - so maybe this project isn't really for me, and that's fine too. =)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Brandes Stoddard​ right. This is not a hack for everyone, and never will be. A question: do you dislike that sort of choice because it feels metagamey? It something else?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Abram Bussiere's point sums up my view quite well. Short-term expenditures are a losing proposition, especially if party members are making different decisions there. DW, and especially your hack, aren't progressive in danger the way D&D and a lot of other games are, but that also factors into the feeling. The metagame nature of the decision is also a big part of it, which probably tells you a lot about my gaming background in itself - much more D&D than indie narrativist games.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Brandes Stoddard It depends on the goal. If your character wants to become a god-slayer, sure. If she wants to get into a dungeon, and get out enough loot to pay off the baron? Then she may not care that she hasn't increased in ability -- the baron won't sell her into slavery.

    ReplyDelete
  7. William Nichols​ If it's a game of a sufficiently short duration, this dichotomy will probably work fine.

    If it's a long campaign, the increasing power disparity between the two will make the godslayer more and more of a focus.

    ReplyDelete
  8. If it's a single-mission campaign, you might be choosing between being awesome several times or saving up for a Cool Thing you never get to use. If it's an extended campaign, it flips the balance, the person who buys temporary things needs to keep buying them, while the person who buys permanent things has resolved some of their needs.

    Since we've established that this doesn't really speak to me, maybe you could talk a little more about what appeals to you in it?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Brandon Sanderson​ Presumably there's a happy midpoint where both players feel equally good/bad about their choices.

    ReplyDelete
  10. So, here's what I love about this:
    -- Real choices. Different needs result in real different outcomes. In contract, my Hardholder in AW will always take +1 Hard as the first advance -- good for him and good for the hold. After that, there's different ways to go, but that first one is obvious. This is different different -- depending upon the circustances, you may need to spend XP to avoid getting hit in the face. Or to make sure you hit someone in the face.

    -- Sometimes, your character just wants to go into a dungeon and get enough money to eat, or to get the baron off your back. This does that -- that XP you come out with is fictionally loot.

    -- Budgeting. Either this is fun for you., or it isn't. So much of life is about choices and appropriate allocation of resources, and this does that.

    -- Minimal math. The plan is NOT to have moves that cost different amounts and to do some Heroes-level math. Not at all -- instead, 1 XP may up a move if used in advance, or increase a stat. Maybe it is more for moves and magic weapons or whatever, but those can cost 5 XP orhowever much.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I think #4 isn't innately tied to this mechanic at all, although this mechanic probably works better with math light.

    #1 is already a thing in AW-based systems, particularly those that let you 'hold' an advance - you can pick up something that's good right now, or pick up something that's likely to be good in the long run. The difference is while picking for total power gives you a more powerful character in the long run, the short term character is still advancing.

    If you had a hardholder in the spend XP to do things game, you'd still probably be on the fast track to Hard +3 - I think that's more of a function of single attribute focused classes than anything else.

    #2 is interesting. I don't have an intuitive grasp of it as described, but curious how this works.

    #3, budgeting, makes me realize I have less of a trouble with this when it's gold spent on temporary vs permanent items, so this dislike of xp spends in temporary advantages might be somewhat a kneejerk reaction on my part.

    I personally tend to avoid gp spends on temporary advantages unless they're trivial or necessary, but I'm kind of a miser.

    I still think it's harder to balance, but that's not an innate reason not to do something.

    ReplyDelete
  12. What if this is initially called gp rather than xp? That is, if you acquire 5 GP worth of treasure, and can use it to either up your character stats, get out of a jam right now, or use it as loot later. Is that more palatable?

    ReplyDelete
  13. It's more palatable to me personally, but this is an irrational bias that I'm not sure is shared by others.

    It wouldn't significantly change my behavior towards the mechanic(use everything possible on becoming stronger).

    ReplyDelete
  14. It may be arbitrary, but yes, that makes it better for me, by shifting the decision to be completely in-character. Do you also intend to push scaled treasure rewards into all areas of gameplay that you would otherwise reward with XP?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Brandes Stoddard yes.

    Abram Bussiere until you get hit and need to not die, anyway. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  16. William Nichols I WILL DIE AT MAXIMUM STRENGTH.

    No, seriously, though, 'everything possible' for me here means 'don't use it for short term stuff unless you really really have to'. You probably also want to keep some GP/XP at hand just for emergencies or to pull out new abilities - actually, no reason to have an ability before you need it(unless it takes time?).

    I think GP does work better than XP fictionally, especially if GP is fluffed as basically magical items, and you can absorb their power(gain abilities) or use them up to do crazy stuff(one-shot use), and then of course sell them once you get out.

    ReplyDelete
  17. This change actually brings it closer to what my initial idea, which was routed in a half-remembered bit from 2e, which I probably remember incorrectly -- that of getting xp for getting loot. I have a penchant for single-systems, and wanted to see the two currency unified. This does that -- you gain xp or cp and can exchange them for each other. So, as gaining copper pieces, perhaps:

    -- 1 cp to gain a +1 to a roll, spent after.
    -- 1 cp to up a roll a segment (6- to 7-9, 7-9 to 10+), spent before
    -- 5 cp to declare that a stat exists; this can be done up to 5 times before all stats are declared.
    -- 5 cp to permanently increase a stat from 0 to 1
    -- 5 cp to permanently increase a stat from 1 to 2
    -- 10 cp to permanently increase a stat from 2 to 3
    --  5 cp to gain access to a basic move
    -- 10 cp to gain access to an advanced move
    -- 10 cp to learn a spell
    -- 5 cp to raise the damage die. (so, d4 to d6, or d8 to d10)

    Maybe this is you teaching someone. Maybe you are bribing heaven. Maybe you are writing a spell down, and ink is expensive.

    This is more or less what I'm thinking. The numbers are subject to heavy revision.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Maybe a setting conceit of coins that are valuable because they contain magic? Could also handwave magic coins appearing with 'hey they're magic', then.

    Does declaring a stat exists mean you have it, or everyone has it? It seems odd to me, either way - having a stat at 0 is basically the same as the stat not existing, right?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Abram Bussiere Declaring a stat exists means its a stat for everyone. I'm stealing from Simple World a little bit here -- through the delcaration of stats, the game can get moved in different directions. So, if Hard is a stat in stead of Strength and Constitution, that tells me something about the story being told.

    ReplyDelete
  20. William Nichols Interesting.

    Considering that it still doesn't do anything until someone has a +1 in the stat... I'd bundle it somehow.

    7-8 XP, and you also get a +1 in the stat when you buy it.

    So you get to say 'this thing exists and I'm good at it'.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Additionally, maybe you can declare it for free, if you take a -1 in it?

    (this thing exists, and I'm bad at it)

    ReplyDelete
  22. Abram Bussiere I like those ideas!

    And yeah, the gp as the currency works really well if everything is magic or high tech or whatever. Then, OF COURSE you can use that magic amulet to up a 6- to a 7-9 -- you overload the magic melange or whatever mcguffin that powers it, and it works out. Similarly, you can absorb its powers to get Cool + 1

    ReplyDelete