Topic: Alternative to Fatepoints

[Nejira]

Okay, so the story goes that I don´t like Fate points so naturally I have tried to come with alternative solutions to RM´s deadliness. This idea was born out of my other idea with armor reducing Criticals, and from the idea that I felt items should be able to break/be destroyed.

Instead of using Fatepoints, I thought about letting the armor take the hit but at the cost of breaking/destroying it. So, at the player´s option, when taking a Critical he may elect to say the armor took the blow and ignore the critical aspect of the Critical. EG: The character is hit by a Krush Critical of E with a roll of 82 which reads "Catch foe in armpit. +30 hits. Crush foe´s ribs and destroy side. Foe drops and dies of nerve and organ damage in 3 rnds." Now thats pretty bad, and without Fatepoint your character is gone. But instead you may select to sacrifice the torso armor (crit says the ribs and side are hit, thus the location of the critical determines which piece of armor must be sacrificed), and negate the critical, but still takes +30 hits.

What exactly happens to the armor, and wether it can be repaired is left for the GM to decide. Based on the Critical´s descriptions of course. In this case, the armor could be torn in the side (if leather & chain) and cracked badly if plate.

The essence of this rule is, while eliminating Fate Points, still keep players from dying too often and give armors an little extra edge. But still maintain that its not a permanent thing, once the piece of armor is broken it cannot save against a second Critical in that location.

What ya think?

[kevinmccollum]

I'm going to have to say I'm sticking with fate points. My players get ten fate points for their characters total. If they burn them up early, they have none for later "life"

with the proposed system, you are going to end up in essence with a fate point system that can be renewed for the cost of a piece of armor. Unlimited fate points in a way. But that is up to you.

[markc]

 I am also going to stick with Fate Points but your idea does seem interesting. If you have RM2's Arms Comp they have rules for armor hits and how they take damage that might be of use to you.
MDC

[Nejira]

with the proposed system, you are going to end up in essence with a fate point system that can be renewed for the cost of a piece of armor. Unlimited fate points in a way.

I know there is a risk for it to be perceived that way, and it may even get players to take greater risks (aka act stupid). But in my experience Fate Points had always gone two ways; either you had spend them all at the first couple of levels or you ended up with a large number later. But then again we used that you gained an new Fate Point each time you gained a level.

This way there are a ingame explanation for the character surviving an otherwise lethal blow. And I might also get rid of the stockpilling of weapons and armors that players (at least mine) tend to do

I am also going to stick with Fate Points but your idea does seem interesting. If you have RM2's Arms Comp they have rules for armor hits and how they take damage that might be of use to you.
MDC

No I dont got that one. I havn´t got any RM2. But I will see if I can find myself a copy. Think a friend of mine still has his RM2 books somewhere.

[ictus]

I like this idea, most of the time my pcs wot bother with armour early on, then jump right into plat or chain when ready, this makes wearing armour at low level very useful removes fate points which I don't use anyway and adds quite a good fudging mechanic that has a character cost not simply the loss of a 'bean'

[Arioch]

I know there is a risk for it to be perceived that way, and it may even get players to take greater risks (aka act stupid). But in my experience Fate Points had always gone two ways; either you had spend them all at the first couple of levels or you ended up with a large number later. But then again we used that you gained an new Fate Point each time you gained a level.

One way to prevent this would be putting a limit on the maximum number of Fate Points a character can hoard... however:

I don't like very much how FP are handled in RM and I've made some attempt to fix them, you can see one of my HR dealing with FP here, if you want (the second part is focused on fate points): http://www.ironcrown.com/ICEforums/index.php?topic=8149.0

I must say that your idea is intriguing, in a certain sense is similar to my way of using FP: the character is saved from death but must face complications (in your case, the armor he's wearing breaks). I love complications. They drive the story forward and are usually very fun to play.  
I think you had a good idea, but I feel it still need some tweaking...

[Marc R]

My only issue with this would be the fact that Fate would favor the Brick armored fighter in favor of the unarmored swashbucking duelist or martial artist.

[RandalThor]

My option would be, if you absolutely don't like FPs, is to just up your character's capabilities. I know that is anathema to the RM/SM gameology (should I ass that term to Wikipedia?  ), but letting them have more character points to distribute to their attributes and more, free talent points would allow them to make above average individuals that would have a much better chance of surviving.  Of course, I never thought it was a bad thing to have the characters be better than your Average Joe, and be more heroic if you will. Just think you can have gritty and heroic, that they are not mutually exclusive.

RM is not like many games where if you make a "super" character you are invulnerable, so you don't have that to worry about. Even if they have all 100s for attributes and 100 free talent points they are still quite killable in this system.

[Emaughan]

I've done a hybrid of this idea.  In my game the PCs have just recieved one of their 1st magic items (their 5-6th level but I'm real stingy).  They are (sound ominous music) "The Bones of Fate".  They are five knuckle bones that each add a magic bonus to a different stat or skill (i.e. the bone of death increases the crit number by +10).  The bonuses given are very useful, and the PCs were shocked that the stingy GM finally gave them some good magic items.  One of the feature of each bone is that it can be used as a "fate point", but once used it desintigrates.  Thus the PCs can avoid certain death - but loose their only (thus far) magic item.

Bottom line, and I think this is Neijra's thinking, allow the PCs an out from those moments where the roles are too brutal, but make them pay for those escapes.  Not sure if I like the armor idea (too cheap and easy) and knowing my PCs they would have multiple sets of armor to change into thus hacking the rule.  Too cheap and easy, but I do agree with the thinking behind it.

[RandalThor]

Of course, you could apply some other sort of negative with the use of a FP. Yes, it gets rid of the critical but in a way that gives a sort of complication to what the PCs need to do. Like if they have to get to a certain place, maybe the FP caused the attack to miss the PC, but caused a cave in and blocked the direct route. Now they have to climb the Cliffs of Craziness to get where they want to go or go back to town and deal with the mean-jerk in control in order to learn of another route. Perhaps he will require a "gift" of some sort.

[Dark Schneider]

The best way to survive is a good play, players searching for problems or using bad strategies surely will die often, I have seen some charcaters die in my group.

But players usually want to use the same character once they find their ideal one, in this case, I have some propositions:

• Don't apply total destruction results in player characters, like the freeze or heat ones that destroy the whole body with no possible restoration. Use a death result but with things like frozen or burnt body, but not destroyed.
• Then, this is a reason for the group to begin a new adventure, to find a way to heal their partner, this could be achieved with a powerfull lay healer, special herbs, etc. Make it possible but hard depending on the damage to repair.
• If players don't want to do it, or it is not possible, give the possibility to "return" with a penalty, instead a free fate point, then allow to reappear death player characters with a penalty, like substracting XPs, maybe lowering a level at its base (in example, a level 5 character returns to level 4 and the XP is set to 30.000, if level 1 is 0 and not 10.000).
• This last point is very usefull in a total party kill, where there is no other possibility to recover the group characters.

Think that allow to survive to death so easily (like using FPs), can affect the game balance, i.e. our group spend so much money in herbs and items for preservation and resurrection that could be used to buy special magical items, but we give more priority to survive in death situations. If we bypass death so easily, then these item types can becom only decoration in item lists, but they are expensive precisely because their great utility.

If you have a ranger or animist in the group, go to some campaigns for search resurrection and preservation herbs exclusively if you have no money or want to save it.

As summary, IMO the best option for this is role-playing, I don't know if you understand what I want to say with this, the game itself offers the needed to cover this.

[Arioch]

The best way to survive is a good play, players searching for problems or using bad strategies surely will die often, I have seen some charcaters die in my group.

You seem to assume that good play = good strategic/tactical choices. I like tactical games, but what if a player puts coherence with his character over tactic? Is RM the wrong game for him?

[Dark Schneider]

You seem to assume that good play = good strategic/tactical choices. I like tactical games, but what if a player puts coherence with his character over tactic? Is RM the wrong game for him?

Not exactly, more generic, good play = good choices. You can have coherence with the character and have a good play out of combat.

Obviously, if you are a berserker, to be coherent, this type of characters have no long life usually for obvious reasons.

It is not reduced to "tactical combat" at all, in a role play game you can do many different choices of all types.

[Arioch]

The problem is that there's only one person who judge whaich choices are good and which are bad... I don't want my players friends to comply to my ideas of what is right for their character just because I'm the GM.

[Nejira]

The problem is that there's only one person who judge whaich choices are good and which are bad... I don't want my players friends to comply to my ideas of what is right for their character just because I'm the GM.

Not to argue, but isn´t that exactly what a GM do?

[Nejira]

My only issue with this would be the fact that Fate would favor the Brick armored fighter in favor of the unarmored swashbucking duelist or martial artist.

It does, but isn´t that the whole point of armor?

My option would be, if you absolutely don't like FPs, is to just up your character's capabilities. I know that is anathema to the RM/SM gameology (should I ass that term to Wikipedia?  ), but letting them have more character points to distribute to their attributes and more, free talent points would allow them to make above average individuals that would have a much better chance of surviving.  Of course, I never thought it was a bad thing to have the characters be better than your Average Joe, and be more heroic if you will. Just think you can have gritty and heroic, that they are not mutually exclusive.

RM is not like many games where if you make a "super" character you are invulnerable, so you don't have that to worry about. Even if they have all 100s for attributes and 100 free talent points they are still quite killable in this system.

True, dont particular care for average PCs myself. I like heroic, but not superheroic.

[RandalThor]

True, dont particular care for average PCs myself. I like heroic, but not superheroic.

And I don't think you are superheroic if a mook still as the ability to stab you with a little knife and kill you...

[Emaughan]

It does not matter how well a player plays his PC, how tactically smart they are, how carefull, etc... This is rolemaster, PCs die.  Players can reduce this chance by being very cautious - but even if they are, they can still end up dieing.  We had one game where a house cat killed a character - great for laughs - and it shows how even a carefull character my end up dead if they even offend Tabby (common sense house rules now prevent such humiliatiing defeats).

So, I like fate points, my players like fate points, and I'm sure their PCs appreciate the little extra insurance.  Also, the player that runs a gung ho barbian may have a chance of making it past first level, and have fun not playing Miss Congeniality all the time to avoid fights (nice kitty, kitty, kitty).

The armor idea is just another twist on fate points - I like making PCs have to give up something to twist fate (good idea Nejira) - but I do not like having it be something as cheap as armor (bad idea Nejira).  Here is how my gamers would play it:
- Wow, that was a tough battle and I had to sacrifice my helmit to keep my brains from getting crushed.
- I agree, are you ready to move on now?
- NO
- No???
- Wait for me to go out to the mules and get a spare before our next battle.
-Oh ya, how many do we have left?

[Arioch]

The problem is that there's only one person who judge whaich choices are good and which are bad... I don't want my players friends to comply to my ideas of what is right for their character just because I'm the GM.

Not to argue, but isn´t that exactly what a GM do?

The GM does many things: "frame" scenes, set obstacles, plays NPCs, narrate the outcome of most actions... but no, I don't think he has to (or has the right to) punish the players for actions he judge stupid.
Don't get me wrong: I'm not saying that PCs should always suceed, or never face the consequences of their actions. I'm just saying that, as Emaughan said, a player should be free to play his berserker without having to roll a new character every other session. He probably plays his character that way because he found it fun and, after all, we play rpgs to have fun...

[Arioch]

The armor idea is just another twist on fate points - I like making PCs have to give up something to twist fate (good idea Nejira) - but I do not like having it be something as cheap as armor (bad idea Nejira). 

What about this: a player can choose to ignore a crit result (not the damage done by an attack, just the crit) by increasing the "level" of risk run by his character. This means that he must put his character in a dangerous situation to avoid the effects of the critical.
For example:
- his armor protects him from the blow but it breaks, now he has to fight without any armor protection (AT1) or maybe he's actions are now hindered by his broken armor (penalty to all actions)
- he stumble and falls, avoiding most of the blow... but now he's prone in front of his enemy
- he deflects his enemy's blow, but his sword breaks
- he's knocked unconscious and taken prisoner instead of dying
and so on...

The player may suggest what happens to his character, but the GM has the final word on it, he may approve it or change it. If the GM change the fate of a PC, the player may still choose to suffer the crit result instead of it...