Official ICE Forums
Systems & Settings => Rolemaster => RMSS/FRP => Topic started by: Velig on April 21, 2008, 11:51:04 AM
-
When me and my players were reviewing experience point awarding rules next question arised: Can an army general get HUGE amount of idea points for planning successful battle? If you strictly follow the rules he would get half of the points earned by his men on the field and this is ridiculous IMHO. Sure he should get some points for his accomplishments but there's limit to everything. Can anyone suggest a good system to calculate the amount he earnes EXP?
-
I do not think the earned exp should be higher than normal "good idea" or "accomplished goal" sort of exp, anywhere from a few hundred to several thousand.
lynn
-
Tell the General:
"The troops are NPCs who don't get XPs, you get half of them !"
-
I wouldn't give him a percentage of the kills, no.
However, I do think if the general was successful and the battle was important, he should be rewarded appropriately. Several hundred to several thousands, as Lynn suggested, seems a good basis IMHO.
-
Yes, I think that the general shouldn't be able to earn more than about 2-3 thousand points for very succesful planning of important battle. Perhaps 0,5-1 thousand for great battles but not so important.
-
The original War-Law gave xp guidelines for the units involved... but none for the leaders.
I suppose the main factor here is to assess the risk to the character (General) involved... *o.5 if little or no risk... none if at no risk. Further factored in is how many times that he has successfully used the tactic that caused the victory.
As far as Idea points, these are shared out between ALL those involved, yes? So, relatively speaking those involved get a greater proportion anyway it wouldn't all go to the general, some would have to go to the unit leaders, some to the NCOs and some to the grunts. True a large proportion should go to the General, but by the time it has been diluted by the above factors it shouldn't be a massive amount.
However. Generals do tend to be rather high level and these xp awards aren't everday events, so a large award isn't really that threatening to game balance due to the amount required for the general to progress.
-
As far as Idea points, these are shared out between ALL those involved, yes?
However. Generals do tend to be rather high level and these xp awards aren't everday events, so a large award isn't really that threatening to game balance due to the amount required for the general to progress.
In core rules of RMFRP in the idea point section the next is stated:
"These experience points are given for ideas and plans that lead to the accomplishment of a goal or a succesful event,set of actions, or adventure."
So the soldiers and lower officers wouldn't get points because they are just following rules.
And if a PC is a general of army it would be quite tempting to wage war all the time because of the idea point. Sure he can lose many battles and his men probably will go against him if he wants to fight without reason but in great wars there are many big battles so still I think the general shouldn't get too much points.
-
And if a PC is a general of army it would be quite tempting to wage war all the time because of the idea point.
What happened to role-playing? Geez, one would think there would be better reasons to go to war than getting XP.
-
"These experience points are given for ideas and plans that lead to the accomplishment of a goal or a succesful event,set of actions, or adventure."
So the soldiers and lower officers wouldn't get points because they are just following rules.
A book rule is a book rule, not a rule for common sense. In fact, taking this to extremes, shouldn't a diplomat or ruler get horrendous amounts of xp for stopping or preventing a war?
We can agree to disagree on this point. Though, it would be a rare occasion indeed that a generals orders are taken in exclusion without being adapted, filtered through the ranks. Also a general does not micro-manage the actions of individual officers who might very well interpret orders to get the job done. It is also rare for a General not to have staff officers who contribute to an overall plan, provide intelligence information etc...
-
And if a PC is a general of army it would be quite tempting to wage war all the time because of the idea point.
What happened to role-playing? Geez, one would think there would be better reasons to go to war than getting XP.
I have noticed that sometimes players only have EXP in their minds and Ihave tried to remind my players that there are other aspects in on role-playing than just hauling EXP. Still sometimes if there isn't many events in a session that would give EXP I get some mumbling from the players :(
-
I have noticed that sometimes players only have EXP in their minds and Ihave tried to remind my players that there are other aspects in on role-playing than just hauling EXP. Still sometimes if there isn't many events in a session that would give EXP I get some mumbling from the players :(
I suggest you to look at how HARP and RMX deal with XPs: IMHO they do a great job in encouraging roleplaying! XPs are given not for the use of skills/monsters killing but for the reaching of certain (personal or story-based) goal, so they should always gain a fair amount of XPs, if they play their roles well! :)
-
Douglas Haig is a great example that you can fight a lot of battles without learning anything of significance..
Winning a battle should be worth a good amount of XP. But make sure the players feel the impact of war. To a medieval/feudal economy, the economic aftershock can be devastating.
-
In modern warfare winning the war is generally logistics and wining the battle is tactics. IMO both are very true if midevil warfare unless you have teleport type spells bringing in supplies, equipment, new fighters etc.
MDC