Automatic APs (Spoilers for Darkening, My players ok)

[zedturtle]

There's actually two subjects here, which wouldn't fit on the topic line.

We play via PbP, so rolls for skills usually go something like this:

Player says or does something, sometimes explicitly calling for a roll, other times a roll is implied.

Zed assigns a TN, makes the roll, and posts the outcome.

I try to make it so that the (especially for Encounters) success/failure represents the NPC's reaction, not necessarily the character's ability.

Folks say roll first and narrate secondly. That would look like:

Player proposes action, asks for TN (and maybe ruling on what skill applies).

Zed answers.

Player narrates action.

Zed narrates response.

I've seen those sorts of games (even play in one) and they tend to move a lot slower than my way.

But my way does create some questions. They are currently playing through my expanded version of 2948 for DoM and, instead of Mogdred coming to them, they have gone to Amon Bauglir and met him. In some great roleplaying, they got enough clues that one of the players was able to guess his true identity without needing to make any rolls.

I congratulated her, and noted that I had intended to make rolls for everyone if no one had guessed the truth in the next update. Another player noted that doing it this way prevented everyone from having a chance to earn an AP from the Insight/Riddle tests that I would have rolled for them.

My initial response was "no chance for AP, but definite XP instead". But I'm not sure that's the right response. What do y'all think?

[Majestic]

Based on the way you do things, do the players get a chance to invoke their Traits for auto successes?

Overall I'd say that as long as your players get chances to earn APs throughout the game, missing out on the occasional opportunity to earn them shouldn't be that big of a deal, especially if it keeps the game from moving at a glacial pace.

[jamesrbrown]

In your PbP, how do characters earn AP normally? I would expect that each time you call for a Test or they propose a Task, they could include a request for earning an AP or an auto success in their write-up. They could remind you of appropriate Traits in case those apply. Once you've made the roll, you would need to respond to their request in your response post.

I'm not sure how you post things (and I've never played in a PbP so please excuse my ignorance), but I think it might be helpful to put in brackets all gaming information that is not narration. So, if a player wanted to invoke a Trait, he might post narration followed by [Can I get an auto Success using my Trait or gain an Advancement point if I get a great or extraordinary Success?].

[Rocmistro]

Zed, I agree with the awarding of AP for it, even though no roll or trait was tagged. I kinda consider it like...Bon Jovi getting an honorary doctorate from Rutgers kind of thing, ya know? At some point in life, what you do, regardless of how you got there, trumps everything, including the formalities and ladders of life that you might otherwise normally have to go through.

[zedturtle]

Based on the way you do things, do the players get a chance to invoke their Traits for auto successes?

Overall I'd say that as long as your players get chances to earn APs throughout the game, missing out on the occasional opportunity to earn them shouldn't be that big of a deal, especially if it keeps the game from moving at a glacial pace.

Yes, by declaring it in their original action. Our common format is using square brackets [[ I use two, out of rampant paranoia about them being accidently interpreted as bbcode. ]] for out-of-character information or by bolding the relevant trait ("His words were neither fancy nor eloquent, but they proceeded truly and from the heart." in an invocation of the True-hearted trait for automatic success).

As, yes, folks do earn APs... we used to do an end-of-session AP audit, but now I try to catch them as we go, and just do a brief check back at a session break (which occurs at a narrative break, there's no real 'down-time' in PbP).

[zedturtle]

In your PbP, how do characters earn AP normally? I would expect that each time you call for a Test or they propose a Task, they could include a request for earning an AP or an auto success in their write-up. They could remind you of appropriate Traits in case those apply. Once you've made the roll, you would need to respond to their request in your response post.

I'm not sure how you post things (and I've never played in a PbP so please excuse my ignorance), but I think it might be helpful to put in brackets all gaming information that is not narration. So, if a player wanted to invoke a Trait, he might post narration followed by [Can I get an auto Success using my Trait or gain an Advancement point if I get a great or extraordinary Success?].

We have a Wiki for each of the characters (here's the main page for the DoM game), so I just add a bullet (•) next to the skill category to represent the AP. First and second APs are automatically added by myself. I might encourage folks to invoke a trait in the out-of-character thread in order to earn the third AP. Sometimes I'm just nice and do it anyways.

And, yes, your second example is a good approximation of how we do it.

[zedturtle]

Zed, I agree with the awarding of AP for it, even though no roll or trait was tagged. I kinda consider it like...Bon Jovi getting an honorary doctorate from Rutgers kind of thing, ya know? At some point in life, what you do, regardless of how you got there, trumps everything, including the formalities and ladders of life that you might otherwise normally have to go through.

I guess my question now is not so much whether or not Mirabella should get an automatic AP (which everyone seems to be okay with), but whether or not I'm shorting y'all by not having everyone else roll. A related question is whether or not, making declarations to the effect of 'all of you are saying the right stuff, this will automatically succeed' is robbing you of the same thing.

[Stormcrow]

I congratulated her, and noted that I had intended to make rolls for everyone if no one had guessed the truth in the next update. Another player noted that doing it this way prevented everyone from having a chance to earn an AP from the Insight/Riddle tests that I would have rolled for them.

Never tell players what you WOULD have done!

Your sequence is just fine, especially for play-by-post. But players should be allowed to ask for advancement points AFTER you've rolled and told them what happened.

What are "automatic APs"? Advancement points are never automatic; the player has to ask for them. This was clearer before the revised rules took away the requirement of doing something significant to earn them. I'm not a fan of the very mechanical revised rules for gaining advancement points.

Also, never EVER allow rolls for the chance of a clue popping into a hero's head. Either the player thinks of it himself, or he proposes a task that leads him to the right conclusion, or you should just give it away.

[zedturtle]

Never tell players what you WOULD have done!

Due to the smiley, I'm intepreting this the best way and taking it as joking advice... I try to open about my process in PbP, much more so than I would in face-to-face games. It's my way of showing involvement, I guess.

Your sequence is just fine, especially for play-by-post. But players should be allowed to ask for advancement points AFTER you've rolled and told them what happened.

Well, of course. But since (now) the first two APs for each category are mechanically triggered, I go ahead and award them without the player needing to make a specific request... again, tightening the feedback loop is essential for PbP.

What are "automatic APs"? Advancement points are never automatic; the player has to ask for them. This was clearer before the revised rules took away the requirement of doing something significant to earn them. I'm not a fan of the very mechanical revised rules for gaining advancement points.[/quote]

I'm using "automatic APs" to represent an AP granted for player cleverness, not character success. And I'm certainly on the fence about doing such a thing.

Also, never EVER allow rolls for the chance of a clue popping into a hero's head. Either the player thinks of it himself, or he proposes a task that leads him to the right conclusion, or you should just give it away.

Again, in the spirit of generous interpretation, I'm going to say that I would have expected that at least one of the players would have taken an action in order to figure out Mogdred's deal in the next update.

But the other thing I would say is that, by virtue of the process (quite possibly amplified by the PbP nature of the game), the understanding that I and the players have of the situation is always a pale reflection of what the characters would actually know. The characters would have a lifetime's experience with the environment and social expecations, they would have met Ingomer and seen him up close (several times for some of them), heard the timbre of his voice, his turns of phrase and body language. So when they met Mogdred, there might have been a lot of subconscious clues that would have been hard to fit into the narrative without completely spoiling the mystery.

Plus, at some point, the game has to move forward (or at least sideways).

[zedturtle]

As a LM, I would have made the roll. Player knowledge's and character knowledge is not suppose to be the same. The fact Tanya guess right dont mean her hobbit character guess the same thing.


Note I am not affected by your decision as neither Nimrodel's traits would have grant her a third AP in that skill categorie.

Well, I haven't done it yet. And, yes, I probably was too quick to confirm her suspicions... and I bet that Mirabella will tread carefully, even if her player knows the truth.