> Thanks, Graham & Wulf, for clarifying that your objection is that
the
> rules are inappropriate for farmers' campaigns, where characters
> ascend from 5W to 5W2 (say) in 240 sessions. How to alter the rules
> for such a campaign? A popular suggestion is to introduce some non
> linearity, so that the cost rises as the ability rises. I've argued
> against this:
One of the least controversial, and easily agreed to house rules in my current game was to seperate out Hero Points from Character Points. HPs give you bumps, while CPs can be spent on advancements.
This gives a nice granularity and latitude for tweaking in rewards. For players, it takes away the headache of whether or not to use HPs for bumpt or whether to scrimp and save for advancements. For me as a GM it means I can put the brakes on advancement when I feel the need, or when it feels appropriate.
For example, in a game session in which we cover the characters activities during several weeks of game time I can hand out 2 or 3 CPs for advancement due to training or on-the-job experience. On the other hand, after a game session covering the action-packed events of a single night I can dish out a few HPs and maybe one CP.
The players seem to like this way of doing things, but it remains to be seen how well it actualy works out.
Simon Hibbs
Powered by hypermail