Gaining an Unusual Background

Michael Hathcock <lord_mykhal RemoveThis @bellsouth.SHOE.net> writes:

> To better prepare myself for the event, if character gains the
> conditions for an Unusual Background during play, does the player
> account for it in his character's point total?

The character point total must always match the traits of that
character. One is a measure of the other.

> For example, in my game world, Magery 0 requires a 5-point Unusual
> Background. The character must be trained and undergo a specific
> ritual to wield magic. If a character undergos the training and the
> ritual, does he gain just Magery 0 or does he gain both Magery 0 and
> Unusual Background [5]?

The traits of the character determine the point total of the
character, so adjust it for each trait that changes.

> I originally thought "no" because the event is not background, it
> occured during play.

When interacting with previously-unencountered characters, the
character with Magery has (by definition, in your game world) an
advantage of being unusual. They have the advantage Unusual Background
[5], hence their character point total now includes those 5 points.

If you think of it not so much of resource conservation (where you try
to find "free" advantages) but more in the sense of accounting (i.e.
making sure the points match the traits), you'll have a smoother ride.

> But that would create an issue where some characters have higher
> point values because they began the game with Magery. That doesn't
> seem fair.

Correct. It's also bad acounting and bad mathematics

--
\ "Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?" "I think so, |
`\ Brain, but shouldn't the bat boy be wearing a cape?" —_Pinky |
_o__) and The Brain_ |
Ben Finney

On Fri, 01 Aug 2008 00:03:03 GMT, Michael Hathcock
<lord_mykhal DeleteThis @bellsouth.SHOE.net> wrote:
>I originally thought "no" because the event is not background, it occured
>during play. But that would create an issue where some characters have
>higher point values because they began the game with Magery. That doesn't
>seem fair.

If someone gains a 5-point Unusual Background in play, they should be
putting in about 5 points' worth of time and effort. While they're
doing that, other PCs should have the opportunity to do other stuff
and acquire other benefits accordingly.

Fred starts as a 150-point non-mage: he gets the special training and
stuff, and picks up the 5-point Unusual Background and Magery 0. He
goes up in value by 10 points. Bill starts as a 150-point mage: while
Fred is in in-play mage training, Bill should have a fair chance of
getting, say, about 10 points in skill or spell training, or around 10
points' worth of Contacts, or whatever. Fred and Bill remain (at least
approximately) balanced.

Alternatively, if the Unusual Background descends from the heavens as
a gift from the GM-gods, then the GM should sometimes find ways to
drop 5 point packages of niceness on other PCs. Otherwise, yes, it'll
look like gross favouritism.

If the time and effort required to pick up that 5 point Unsual
Background is too trivial to correspond to 5 points in skill training,
a 5 point gift of social connections from the GM, or whatever, then
you need to rethink the cost of the Unusual Background. It sounds like
it really isn't that Unusual.
--
Phil Masters
* http://www.philm.demon.co.uk *
A: It disregards the normal, accepted structure of text and conversation.
Q: What is the problem with it?
A: Top-Posting.
Q: What is the most widespread problem with Internet message formatting today?

Phil Masters <phil RemoveThis @philm.demon.co.uk> wrote in
news:i5p5945ot59983u5f8q4lktls4kt3us248@4ax.com:

> If the time and effort required to pick up that 5 point Unsual
> Background is too trivial to correspond to 5 points in skill training,
> a 5 point gift of social connections from the GM, or whatever, then
> you need to rethink the cost of the Unusual Background. It sounds like
> it really isn't that Unusual.

In my campaign, magic is more commonly encountered as Powers, not as
spells. I wanted the game to feature swords over spells, and magic to be
really mysterious. Basically, the Uber-God decided that magic is too
powerful to place in the hands of mortals and restricted True Magic to
five immortals known as the Wizards (yes, I know...I know) [1]. Lesser
beings receive magic in the form of Powers (i.e. the Gift of Healing, the
Gift of Sight, etc.) that are represented by using Advantages.

One of my players wants to start the game with a spell-casting thief-type
character who uses magic to aid in his "occupation." [2] He likes the
idea of gaining his magic training from an agent (read: Demon) of the
Black Wizard (the rogue wizard.) FYI; he also gained two disadvantages:
Secret (trained by a demon) and Enemy (Black Wizard). He turned against
his former teacher.

I am just anticipating other players who may wish to make similar
arrangements for their characters. Besides, I like the idea of demon-
trained mages (maybe I'll call them sorcerers...who knows) running around
upsetting the balance of things.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] I am a huge fan of the tales of J.R.R. Tolkien. I have never been
real happy with Dungeons and Dragons because I have never been able to
reproduce a land with the feel of LOTR. I recently switched to GURPS and
I couldn't be happier. (Yes, I know of the current LOTR RPG system as my
sister is a GM. I just never had the time/money to try it. I also loved
the old MERP (Middle-Earth Role Playing) game but it was just too
complicated for my players for us to play.)


[2] He is a long-time fan of Rogue/Wizard multiclass characters under
Dungeons & Dragons.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Michael Hathcock
"Who wants milky-minutes anyway?"

>>>>> "MH" == Michael Hathcock <lord_mykhal RemoveThis @bellsouth.SHOE.net> writes:

MH> For example, in my game world, Magery 0 requires a 5-point
MH> Unusual Background. The character must be trained and undergo a
MH> specific ritual to wield magic. If a character undergos the
MH> training and the ritual, does he gain just Magery 0 or does he
MH> gain both Magery 0 and Unusual Background [5]?

How do you award points in general?

If you just hand out points and let the players choose where to spend
them, then I think the 5-point Unusual Background ought to be required,
making the cost of Magery 0 effectively 10 points. You might require
the player to have 10 points earmarked before the ritual happens.

If you occasionally drop advantages on the characters ("Okay, you have
a 2-point Favor from Lord Nara, and a +1 Reputation") then it's
reasonable to have this player's character miss out on about 10 points'
worth before dropping these two advantages on him. ("Lord Nara suspects
you've been associating with a seedier element, and that's enough to
prevent him from acknowledging his Favor to you; and that rippled
through the social circles in the city, so you also get a -5 Reputation,
Distrusted by Lord Nara, to counteract your +1 Reputation.)

In either case, I think 10 points is 10 points. If Magery 0 requires an
Unusual Background at character creation, it should also require it in
play -- the background is just as unusual.

Charlton


--
Charlton Wilbur
cwilbur RemoveThis @chromatico.net

Michael Hathcock wrote:
> To better prepare myself for the event, if character gains the conditions
> for an Unusual Background during play, does the player account for it in
> his character's point total?
>
> For example, in my game world, Magery 0 requires a 5-point Unusual
> Background. The character must be trained and undergo a specific ritual to
> wield magic. If a character undergos the training and the ritual, does he
> gain just Magery 0 or does he gain both Magery 0 and Unusual Background
> [5]?
>
> I originally thought "no" because the event is not background, it occured
> during play. But that would create an issue where some characters have
> higher point values because they began the game with Magery. That doesn't
> seem fair.
>
> Michael Hathcock

If a character does something during play that causes him to acquire
advantages or disadvantages, patrons or enemies, this does not require
the "spending" of "character points" according to my reading of Basic.
The award of points for "gaming experience" of course are to allow the
PLAYERS some measure of their gaming techniques, as well as to provide a
method to allow the characters to advance in skills without resorting to
time use forms. It has nothing to do game balance or character balance.

YMMV
Roger

On Fri, 1 Aug 2008 07:27:15 -0700 (PDT), "copeab@yahoo.com"
<copeab RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:

<snip>

>So, to recap, abandon UBs and don't worry about PCs have unequal point
>totals.

This advice assumes that *all* of your players are sufficiently mature
to be able to accept inequality at the gaming table. Many players
aren't. Be very careful if you decide to go this route.

--
Rob Kelk Personal address (ROT-13): eboxryx -ng- tznvy -qbg- pbz
"There's always somebody who's going to hate your work, no matter
how good it is. DON'T LET HIM CHASE YOU AWAY FROM WRITING, BECAUSE
THAT WAY HE WINS." - Robert M. Schroeck, 18 July 2006

Roger Connor <raconnor.RemoveThis@email.unc.edu> wrote in
news:48937695$1_2@news.unc.edu:

> If a character does something during play that causes him to acquire
> advantages or disadvantages, patrons or enemies, this does not require
> the "spending" of "character points" according to my reading of Basic.
> The award of points for "gaming experience" of course are to allow the
> PLAYERS some measure of their gaming techniques, as well as to provide
> a method to allow the characters to advance in skills without
> resorting to time use forms. It has nothing to do game balance or
> character balance.
>
> YMMV
> Roger

This question stems from the text on pages B294 through B296, under the
section "Transformations" where it discusses various methods characters
may utilize to gain certain advantages in play. In my games, temporary,
single-use, or GM-gifted advantages are accounted for in the character's
point total, but no character points (CP) must be spent on the player's
behalf. Other advantages must be paid for by the player. This is to
keep a wealthy character from gaining multiple advantages for free by
spending tons of money.

This is house rule that spans my campaign settings. My current setting
offers little in ways of transformations as True Magic is beyond most
mortals. Other campaigns, those that are more Dungeons & Dragons-ish or
SciFi-ish, allow for my players to have more options. This is for
consistency's sake.

Michael Hathcock

Michael Hathcock schrieb:
> To better prepare myself for the event, if character gains the conditions
> for an Unusual Background during play, does the player account for it in
> his character's point total?
>
> For example, in my game world, Magery 0 requires a 5-point Unusual
> Background. The character must be trained and undergo a specific ritual to
> wield magic. If a character undergos the training and the ritual, does he
> gain just Magery 0 or does he gain both Magery 0 and Unusual Background
> [5]?
>
> I originally thought "no" because the event is not background, it occured
> during play. But that would create an issue where some characters have
> higher point values because they began the game with Magery. That doesn't
> seem fair.
>
> Michael Hathcock
if you think that magery is too cheap, why not raise the cost to 10pts ?

in your case i think the character should not have to pay for unusual
background. i think unusual background is a catch-all tool for the GM if
he thinks that the character is unbalanced.
e.g. an orc raised by elves and used and respected in elven culture,
maybe trained in elven fighting styles.

Roger Connor <raconnor DeleteThis @email.unc.edu> writes:

> If a character does something during play that causes him to acquire
> advantages or disadvantages, patrons or enemies, this does not
> require the "spending" of "character points" according to my reading
> of Basic.

It doesn't require the "spending" of points by the player, but the
point total of the character still changes to reflect whatever traits
they now have. See "Traits gained in play", p. B291.

> The award of points for "gaming experience" of course are to allow
> the PLAYERS some measure of their gaming techniques, as well as to
> provide a method to allow the characters to advance in skills
> without resorting to time use forms. It has nothing to do game
> balance or character balance.

I think you're confusing two issues.

The "point total" of a character is a *measure* of the traits of that
character. It *always* reflects the current traits of that character,
and changes as the traits change. See "Character points in play", p.
B11.

The "bonus points" awarded by the GM are a *currency* for the player
to spend to modify the traits on a character. They're not part of the
character or the point total until they are spent. Once the player
modifies the character's traits by spending bonus points, the point
total of the character is adjusted just like for any other change of
traits.

Any change in the character's traits, whether through the character
creation process, through time-use practice, through events in play,
or through GM fiat, is always reflected by changing the point total of
the character. This *is* a way of measuring one character against
another.

Whether the group actually *cares* enough about measuring characters
against each other to actually write the changes in character point
totals after play begins is up to the group to decide.

--
\ "The right to search for truth implies also a duty; one must |
`\ not conceal any part of what one has recognized to be true." |
_o__) —Albert Einstein |
Ben Finney

Ben Finney wrote:
> Roger Connor <raconnor RemoveThis @email.unc.edu> writes:
>
>> If a character does something during play that causes him to acquire
>> advantages or disadvantages, patrons or enemies, this does not
>> require the "spending" of "character points" according to my reading
>> of Basic.
>
> It doesn't require the "spending" of points by the player, but the
> point total of the character still changes to reflect whatever traits
> they now have. See "Traits gained in play", p. B291.

>> The award of points for "gaming experience" of course are to allow
>> the PLAYERS some measure of their gaming techniques, as well as to
>> provide a method to allow the characters to advance in skills
>> without resorting to time use forms. It has nothing to do game
>> balance or character balance.
>
> I think you're confusing two issues.
>
> The "point total" of a character is a *measure* of the traits of that
> character. It *always* reflects the current traits of that character,
> and changes as the traits change. See "Character points in play", p.
> B11.

The point total of a character is pretty much irrelevant in determining
playability of the character. I have designed a few and had a few
presented to me as GM that were very useless in the campaign being run.
Of particular note was one Khorbas, designed using 100 points with -40
points disads that was designed as a "money lender" and was 100% useless
in the campaign - a caravan trek - even as a passenger.

>
> The "bonus points" awarded by the GM are a *currency* for the player
> to spend to modify the traits on a character. They're not part of the
> character or the point total until they are spent. Once the player
> modifies the character's traits by spending bonus points, the point
> total of the character is adjusted just like for any other change of
> traits.
>
> Any change in the character's traits, whether through the character
> creation process, through time-use practice, through events in play,
> or through GM fiat, is always reflected by changing the point total of
> the character. This *is* a way of measuring one character against
> another.
>
> Whether the group actually *cares* enough about measuring characters
> against each other to actually write the changes in character point
> totals after play begins is up to the group to decide.
>

Hadn't noticed that variation of the Basic 3e sidebar. The emphasis on
MUST alter the point total is a little strange for my taste- I don't
want to have to do bookkeeping either as the Plater or the GM.

As GM, I determine what starting capabilities I want to deal with - I
threw out the suggested limits on points, ads & disads many years ago
(1984)and told my group to design the character concept and then we'd
discuss whether or not this overbalanced the scenario. As Player, I use
whatever points are necessary to create my character concept, then
juggle until I meet the criteria of the GM. Only once or twice has this
been difficult.

After character creation, the point value of the character has NEVER
been referred to. We alter the character to reflect whatever happens,
add points when available to skills or gain skills as necessary or
desired, but I personally don't re-add the point totals, nor do I ask
that my player's do so. I might mention that we don't do the equivalent
of the old D&D thing of "pull out a couple of 5th level characters for
this night's dungeon", either.

Here's to enjoyable Gaming!,
Roger

Roger Connor <night-hunter.RemoveThis@earthlink.net> writes:

> Hadn't noticed that variation of the Basic 3e sidebar. The emphasis on
> MUST alter the point total is a little strange for my taste- I don't
> want to have to do bookkeeping either as the Plater or the GM.

The only sense in which the point total "must be adjusted" is the
"mathematical law" one. I'm not saying anyone actually must *do*
anything; just pointing out that the point total, as a measure of the
character's traits, *does* change.

It's entirely up to the group whether they want to bother *tracking*
the point total of the character as it changes; but the point total
*does* change regardless of whether it's accurately tracked.

All this was directly answering the OP's question about *how* the
point total changes when the character's traits change; none of it is
a commandment to actually do anything about it.

The only "must" I'd recognise is that *if* one wants an accurate point
total for the character as the traits change, one *must* account for
all the traits of the character in the point total. This "must" is
only binding on those who would claim they have an accurate, current
point total for the character; anyone who doesn't care about making
that claim can ignore the "must".

> After character creation, the point value of the character has NEVER
> been referred to. We alter the character to reflect whatever happens,
> add points when available to skills or gain skills as necessary or
> desired, but I personally don't re-add the point totals, nor do I ask
> that my player's do so.

Entirely valid, but seemingly irrelevant to the context in which I was
answering: Those (like you and me) who don't care about tracking the
point total after character creation can ignore it. Those who *do*
care about doing so (like the OP) should know how the rules treat the
point total relative to the character's traits.

--
\ "Time's fun when you're having flies." —Kermit the Frog |
`\ |
_o__) |
Ben Finney

On 2008-08-02, Ben Finney <bignose+hates-spam@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
> Roger Connor <night-hunter RemoveThis @earthlink.net> writes:
>> After character creation, the point value of the character has NEVER
>> been referred to. We alter the character to reflect whatever happens,
>> add points when available to skills or gain skills as necessary or
>> desired, but I personally don't re-add the point totals, nor do I ask
>> that my player's do so.
>
> Entirely valid, but seemingly irrelevant to the context in which I was
> answering: Those (like you and me) who don't care about tracking the
> point total after character creation can ignore it. Those who *do*
> care about doing so (like the OP) should know how the rules treat the
> point total relative to the character's traits.

In some special cases it becomes necessary to actually know what a
character's current point total is and in such cases his point total
needs to be calculated or at least estimated. For instance, if you
have an Ally or Enemy the potency of which is measured as a percentage
of your own point total then as you increase in capability so should
the Ally/Enemy and this requires you to have some idea what the PC's
point total is.

Cheers,
Bent D
--
Bent Dalager - bcd RemoveThis @pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd
powered by emacs