Re: [WW] XP Awards & House Rules

[gathomas4@juno.com]

On Sat, 27 Apr 2002 11:30:27 EDT LiveDaD@aol.com writes:
> >b. When speaking in character did the player speak as the player 
> would
> >or as their character would?
> 
> Partial agree... Some players dig the speaking in or like the 
> character 
> others prefer the stand offish thing (I notice it really depends on 
> their 
> adlibing/ham skill =). I usually give more points for general 
> keeping it in 
> character (Especially keeping it in their characters scope of 
> knowledge... 
> None of that 'Oh its a troll, pull out the oil!' stuff =).

All of the things listed are tailored for my group and this is a big one.
 We've played a by the book D&D game and the characters have all achieved
16th level over some 45 sessions or so.  As a result, i'm familiar with
their individual styles of play.  When players do get a chance to
actually talk in character, it can really destroy the mood and interrupt
the flow of important clues, if the player decides to crack a joke at
that time. Some prefer not to talk in character so much and that is fine,
but even then i expect them to stick to what their character knows of the
game world and their current situation. 

>c. Did the player contribute to the session stalling or did the 
> player
> >help to keep the session moving?
> 
> Absolutely positively 100% agree. The flow of the game is what makes 
> of 
> breaks the game. If a player is lollygagging I do my 6 countdown. If 
> they 
> don't spit it out the character uses that round 'thinking' =).

Once the spotlight is on in an action scene, my players move pretty fast.
 This rule, for us, is for when player A is doing his thing and player B
starts talking to player C about the latest Hackmaster supplement and how
lame it is.  Pretty soon people are politely waiting for player B to shut
up.

> >d. Did the player play a mundane, play-it-safe, forgettable 
> character or
> >a larger-than-life, risk-taking, 
> >memorable character?
> 
> Partially agree... My main focus is on the character itself. I have 
> had some 
> great ones at my table and I prefer the ones that have a distinct 
> flavor. 
> Most have nothing to do with combat/hero thing. I have seen and 
> played a few 
> really fun ones... The one I had the best time playing was a 
> Rastifarian 
> Dwarf Paladin named Ganja =).

See, i like Ganja (the character idea ;)

That to me is a memorable character. Now if you play that character and
make decisions the way Ganja would make them, rather than based on player
knowledge of the odds of success, then you'll have a risk taker as well. 
The end result is that he's not generic, stereotypical, and playing it
safe so he can put on levels.  Which is what i like to see, because it
makes for an entertaining character.


> Is it me or is the experience table still need a little working on? 

From our D&D playtest campaign i have to say that it works, but it's too
much hassle unless you're running a combat heavy game.  Even my Omaha
Beach campaign opener was rated using a free form system.  Surviving all
that carnage even though you only killed a small number of enemy should
be worth something right?  And who wants to puzzle out the CRs of "traps"
like barb-wire, artillery shelling, land mines, etc.

Happy Gaming, =)

screenmonkey





________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.