Topic: Pre-allocating DPs?

[shnar]

I think I've been playing this game wrong for leveling up. When a character levels, we've followed these steps:
 - Roll for Stat Gains
 - Tally new DPs
 - Spend DPs on Skills
 - Make any other necessary rolls (Skill lists, BodyDev, etc)

I vaguely recall reading in Spacemaster that you don't really spend your DPs, but rather you allocate the DPs you want to spend NEXT level, and this new level that you just earned, you ask the GM if you truly earned the DPs that you had allocated the previous level.

That always seemed like unecessary bookkeeping, so we just simply spent them the level we earned them. Were we doing this wrong?

-shnar

[Mider]

We have always done it where you allocate the level prior to earning it, this is becuase the reason you are getting better at something is that you have been practicing.  Also, we always had the persons who would see what is happening and than try to make changes to the allocation.  This normally was after they got a weapon they couldn't use and wanted to take the skill just prior tot he level up. 

[Old Man]

Same here. Ideally, after making level N, I ask the player to allocate for N+1. Then if they are seeking a new spell or skill, they need to allocate gametime to do such (find tomes, instructors, etc.). Once N+1 is reached, we might tweak the allocation based on the past adventures during level N.

Ciao,
Old Man

[Marc R]

Hmm, another RM2/RMC variation.

The spend, level, gain ranks is indeed the RM2 mechanic, but not the RMC one.

The problem being, you purchase a full level of nautical skills, then spend a month crossing a desert. . . ."I crossed the sahara, and improved my sailing."

The one benefit of the old method, that Old man pointed out, we kind of turned on it's head. . . .the GM may require you to train/study to earn certain skills, which you then buy when you go up a level.

[shnar]

I'm glad to see that it's gone in RMC, since it was gone in my campaign anyways

As others have pointed out, chargen was rather complicated enough, so last thing I wanted to do was have my players go through level 0, level 1, then prespend for level 2. It made the most sense for us to just spend it as we earned the level. However, the GM *always* had final approval on earned skills. The player had to effectively justify the skills he'd earned from his adventuring. To use your example, if for the entire past level the character was crossing a dessert, the GM wouldn't allow any DPs to be spent on sailing.

As an interesting variant on leveling rules, I played in one campaign where it was effectively "level-less". Effectively, after using a skill, you would roll the dice to see if your skill increased by 1. The formula was:

OpenEnded Roll + (100 - CurrentBaseSkill) + StatBonus

If you got > 100, you increased your skill by 1. If you got < 0, you lost 1 on your skill. This formula made it more and more difficult to get to 100 in a skill (and extremely difficult to get over 100). You got to roll this I think once a "game-day" (or might have been game-week, can't remember) based on the skill you used (so you couldn't pick a lock 1000 in one day and max out your skill), and also after any combat sessions, you would see what weapons you used and you'd roll on those skills. If you took *any* damage in the combat, you got to roll for Body Development.  And I think that was how levels were finally earned. Every 5 pts of Body Development you earned, you increased a level (you have to have levels for StatGains and ResistanceRolls). And lastly, you got 5 "free" rolls every game-month to indicate hobbies and things you've been practicing during the month.

Was an interesting system, but definately not very casual...

-shnar

[Marc R]

That sounds something like the dark conspiracy/twilight 2000 method, unless my brain is rotting.

[shnar]

Not familiar with those (though Twilight 2000 sounds familiar, not sure why). What are they?

-shnar

[thrud]

We'd always spend the DP's when we reached the new lvl  but depending on the gm he would sometimes require the pc to train in the skills he wanted to improve. Especially if they hadn't been used in play the previous lvl.

[Marc R]

I suspect the goal of allocate/level/buy was to force you to chart the course of character development ahead one level, and it actually works fine, except when something unexpected happens. . . .even when we played with those rules, the GM never objected to moving around stuff when you actually leveled up, to fit better with what happened over the level, or where the character was moving at this point. . . .the method has almost no affect on play in fast leveling games (i.e. say one level per session) but can create really annoying issues when you have a slow leveling game. . .multi sessions per level, time between sessions more than a week. . . .you end up with "Why was I buying herb lore?" since 2 months later you forget the logic behind that choice.

Shnar, both are games I played long ago, using the GDW system:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twilight_2000
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Conspiracy

[shnar]

What I always disliked about prespending was A) the extra bookkeeping, and B) by the rules, if you didn't "earn" your allocated DPs, you lost them. Meaning if you put a rank in Herb Lore, but never in that level found time to study herbs, then you lost that rank. Just seemed easier to spend ranks as you leveled.

I vaguely recall Twilight 2000 now, I think I played one session way back in my Jr. High School days. But I don't remember anything about the system. The one Rolemaster variant I played was interesting because it *was* Rolemaster, with linear progressive skills. Maybe I'll take the time to write real details and post it up as an alternate way to play...

-shnar

[Old Man]

What I always disliked about prespending was A) the extra bookkeeping, and B) by the rules, if you didn't "earn" your allocated DPs, you lost them. Meaning if you put a rank in Herb Lore, but never in that level found time to study herbs, then you lost that rank. Just seemed easier to spend ranks as you leveled.
...
-shnar

I'd allow the DPs to carry-over if the PC doesn't find the mystical loremaster for the 25th rank in swords or to learn an obscure spell list...

Ciao,
Old Man

[Dax]

What I always disliked about prespending was A) the extra bookkeeping, and B) by the rules, if you didn't "earn" your allocated DPs, you lost them. Meaning if you put a rank in Herb Lore, but never in that level found time to study herbs, then you lost that rank. Just seemed easier to spend ranks as you leveled.

The lost of the wrong allocated DPs is definitly wrong.
DPs stand for experience the PC made and time of training in a skill.
If the PCs pass through a desert she will/can't train swimming,
so she uses her time (DPs) in an other way.
The GM's fiat could of course change some or all allocations
(positive: "You must learn this" or negative: "You aren't allowed to learn that").
But to rip them away mean PCs won't try to learn special skills.


The extra book keeping was not that problem with the old check-box character sheet:
I used to mark the skill the PC will learn with only "/ " and made a cross out of it at lvl gain.

[shnar]

But I think the official rules is that if they don't work on the skill that they preallocated, then they lose those DPs. That's one reason I've never liked the rule. Instead, the GM simply has approval for skills spent, and it effectively becomes the same thing without the complex added step a relatively complex process as it is (leveling up).

But I guess this is a moot point since this was removed in RMC

-shnar

[markc]

I have divided the levels into 3 parts, 1.1, 1.2 and 2.0.
Note: You can only buy 1 rank per .1, .2 or .0
1)You start at level 1 gain 1/3 exp. and you gain 1/3 DP to spend.
2)Do the same for level 1.2.
3) At level 2 you do stat gain and finish your DP expendature.
It works very well in RMSS and players are spending DP's in samller amount. Also you can have a slower level progression and still have character development.
MDC