| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Arion Elenim |
Posted - 18 Nov 2003 : 23:14:08
It seems that the DMG has only a very haphazard way of rewarding roleplay XP...... I propose we here at Candlekeep come up with a better one....
It seems that a couple of variables need to be contended with if there is or ever will be one...
First, it seems that DM discretion needs to be the core of the system.....as it is impossible to say what kind of situations feature "good" or "bad" roleplay...
Also, character level should be a factor, as 50 XP to a level one rogue who exhibits certain traits befitting a particularly interesting character is more than enough, but to a Master Thief in the Shadow Guilds of Calimport, 50 XP is a piddly reward for good roleplay indeed...
Then, we have to define "good" roleplay. I suppose that "roleplay" could be defined as playing D&D in a way that more often than not appears to be:
a) realistic
b) interesting
c) always "in character"
d) furthers (or opposes) the nature of their class/alignment/race in a way that makes the DM take notice
I suppose that then it is a simple matter of defining a particular moment, speech or action in gameplay as a certain type of what I'm going to call distinction. For example, a rogue who can't help but put his hands in someone else's pockets is "in character" and deserves a certain amount of XP, but if that same PC has a boiling conflict within his soul as to whether or not he should steal at all, that is deserving of substantially more (as far as THIS DM is concerned).
So...we have distinctions of behavior....
a) low typical (the PC is displaying behavior that is likely to be cliche to their particular archetype - ex: a Paladin choosing to save a maiden in distress)
b) high typical (the PC is displaying behavior that is particularly representative of their particular archetype but is not cliche - ex: an elf's aloofness is put in check to regard new religious ideals)
c) low exceptional (the PC is displaying behavior that is either contrary to or oddly particular but fairly common to their particular archetype - ex: a cleric of Bane finds it beyond his capacity to lie even though doing so could further his designs)
d) high exceptional (the PC is displaying behavior that is either contrary to or oddly particular but not neccesarily common to their particular archetype - ex: a Chaotic Neutral sorceror chooses not to use his spells or weapons but through the mere power of his words convinces an ogre to be merciful - simply because the sorceror thought it might be fun to try such a risky thing.....)
e) low extraordinary (the PC is displaying behavior that is particularly introspective and shows great dedication to the character's value or personality - ex: even though tempted to root through a dragon's horde for personal gain, a PC realizes that her monk has no desire for material items and passes the opportunity by)
f) high extraordinary (the PC is displaying behavior that is extremely introspective and shows intense dedication to the characters value or personality - ex:a wizard chooses to sacrifice his own life rather than risk the loss of a tome of great intellectual value)
After classification of the "distinction" of the roleplay, the DM must simply modify for character level (perhaps using the regular "encounter table" in the Dungeon Master's Guide) then add appropriate bonuses for the level of distinction (perhaps by adding 25% for each level of distinction.
Any thoughts? |
| 3 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Yasraena |
Posted - 20 Nov 2003 : 04:34:33
Those are some cool ideas. You really nailed the examples in the distinctions. Myself and the other two GM's in our group use something similar, but then again, we all know each other's RPing style so it's easy to make the decision on how much each player should get for their individual actions. 
We base experience for roleplaying on how much the player stays in character, which is based on a couple of things.
1. The PC's background and history. (BIIIG part)
2. How consistent the player has been in roleplaying the PC that he's created in that background. (did he do this because his PC really would have done it, or because he knew it would benefit him as a player? There's a fine line there.)
3. The individual situation - would it be easy or hard to 'stay in character' during the given situation.
Situations where it easy shouldn't warrant a lage XP award, but situations where it's hard should. The tougher it is to stay in character, the larger the XP should be awarded for doing so. |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 19 Nov 2003 : 15:21:02
Yes, I must say that this is very good. Far better than others I've seen, such as at Community 3e. The closest was one that was at the above website, but seemed to depend on a DM/player relationship where both parties had known each other for a while, were used to each other's roleplay, and where the player was very unbiased with regard to how much (s)he got. (I know that I'd have a hard time passing up points, and I consider myself to be someone able to detach his feelings from most subjects. Unfortunately, I'm also a bit too competitive. I like having the highest "score."  )
Anyway, I think that this is the best base for a "universal" system that I've seen so far. I agree on using the Challenge Rating to adjust the score, by the way -- just as a normal goblin is (::yawn::) old hat for a level-ten fighter, that same fighter shouldn't get much XP for acting like a stereotype. |
| Lord Rad |
Posted - 19 Nov 2003 : 07:50:04
Hmmmmm excellent ideas there ArionElenim, reckon ill apply that to my campaign 
Youre quite right in the typical categories too! |
|
|
