RPG Theory: Starting Awesome, Part 2
Jan. 31st, 2007 12:24 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
In an exciting confluence of events, my musings on experience in games yesterday was followed by an interesting post to the Fate RPG mailing list on virtually the same subject. I encourage you to read it here: http://tinyurl.com/2hjztr.
I found this piece to be particularly intriguing:
So, my question to you is this: How would you feel about playing a game that had no traditional advancement at all? You're characters would grow as "people", but you wouldn't be adding new points to the sheet. Periodically, you would be able to shuffle things around ("My character has been doing a lot of fighting lately, but very little water-skiing. I'll remove a level from Athletics and add it to Brawl") or possibly remove a low-level skill entirely and replace it with a new one, but the actual talley of points on your sheet would remain pretty well static.
This would, of course, assume that the game you are playing is set up so that your character "starts awesome."
Having never actually done it before, I think it's something that I would be interested in trying. I can see several benefits to this:
1) The GM always has a good idea of what your characters can do (assuming that the "shuffling" mentioned above occurs only at GM-specified intervals) and the power levels at which they operate, which defines not just a few sessions, but the entire campaign.
2) It would make it less likely that different characters would start stepping on the toes of each others' main shticks, assuming that you have a variety of concepts/skill sets from the get-go.
3) If you play in games where some players miss the game periodically, characters won't start out-powering one another, because people aren't going to be gaining bunches of character points that the person who missed didn't.
4) Related to the previous point, it makes it very easy to bring in new characters, because the starting (and, therefor, ongoing) character power level is already set.
Thoughts?
I found this piece to be particularly intriguing:
QUESTION THE FIRST: Do I need to include "advancement"?
Something the debut Fate 3.0 game Spirit of the Century makes no bones about is that its cast members should be considered in many ways "complete"-- Ie, they've figured themselves out to a point, and the rest is prioritizing and drama. Members of the century club are beyond broadening horizons and more about using what they've gained.
Consider whether "progression" is a big motivator for your setting. Maybe character growth will come more from the evolution and replacement of aspects as plots resolve and relationships change. Maybe your story focusing on an elite black-ops crew needs to focus on drama-- they're already elite, right? Maybe "leveling" would be a distraction from the game's real themes!
If so, skip it. I mean it. Forget the rest of this article and play what fits your game.
So, my question to you is this: How would you feel about playing a game that had no traditional advancement at all? You're characters would grow as "people", but you wouldn't be adding new points to the sheet. Periodically, you would be able to shuffle things around ("My character has been doing a lot of fighting lately, but very little water-skiing. I'll remove a level from Athletics and add it to Brawl") or possibly remove a low-level skill entirely and replace it with a new one, but the actual talley of points on your sheet would remain pretty well static.
This would, of course, assume that the game you are playing is set up so that your character "starts awesome."
Having never actually done it before, I think it's something that I would be interested in trying. I can see several benefits to this:
1) The GM always has a good idea of what your characters can do (assuming that the "shuffling" mentioned above occurs only at GM-specified intervals) and the power levels at which they operate, which defines not just a few sessions, but the entire campaign.
2) It would make it less likely that different characters would start stepping on the toes of each others' main shticks, assuming that you have a variety of concepts/skill sets from the get-go.
3) If you play in games where some players miss the game periodically, characters won't start out-powering one another, because people aren't going to be gaining bunches of character points that the person who missed didn't.
4) Related to the previous point, it makes it very easy to bring in new characters, because the starting (and, therefor, ongoing) character power level is already set.
Thoughts?
no subject
Date: 2007-02-11 06:38 am (UTC)I can point to my two most favorite games of all time. First i would cite 'Afterworld,' a Home Brew game where we all played Anthropomorphic Dinosaurs in a slightly futuristic world. Think 'Die Hard' and 'Ninja Turtles' combined. We started awesome, stayed awesome, and even gained a few things. However, they were very, very specific. I got +2 to rocket launchers, for instance, because i shot a semi truck off of a bridge when it was persuing us. Until then, my character had nominal experience with rocket launchers. And, now that i think of it, i never shot a rocket launcher again in that game, not for the two years after i got the +2. Why? it wasn't in the character.
Two is a campaign in GURPS. While i still have my misgivings about the system, the GM really used it to his advantage to start us out as 'seasoned' heroes, but really let us grow in power along the way. It was especially amazing how i wanted to start as a Jedi knockoff, but couldn't afford it. So after buying Wolverine's power set and adding a Venom-symbiont suit, the last leg of the adventure comes and he outright GIVES me Jedi powers. I reached Nerd-vanna.
So...i guess i just wanted to say this was an awesome thread and i will be spacing out at work all day tomorrow constantly thinking about it's concepts...huzzah.