So, experience as a reward. In many of the pre-PbtA games that I enjoyed playing, the GM was given a guide for giving xp and along with that guide was often what I called the arbitrary clause. As a GM, I often made use of the arbitrary clause when the methods for xp gain were otherwise not rewarding my PCs.
I’m curious about what design decisions lead to this arbitrary clause being removed in PbtA games.
I’m asking specifically because I created a discussion over in the Dungeon World Tavern and our conversation lead to a twist on the xp-on-miss mechanic that put the reward of the xp in the hands of the GM (so, Fighter misses a blow with a hammer, hammer strikes a brazier, the coals fly at the Rogue and the Rogue has to Defy Danger, the Rogue is given the xp because he was the one negatively impacted by the miss).
The reason for the solution is an extreme imbalance that has cropped up at two of my tables for games using the xp-on-miss mechanic and I am trying to find a replacement for my upcoming DW game.
Personally, I hate having to decide who gets XP and for what reasons as GM. Games that instruct the GM to award XP or other rewards “as they see fit” are really not my style. I’m already taking on the pressure of running the game, so having to hand out rewards and worry about being fair is not something I want to deal with on top of that.
Awarding a point of XP on a miss, or when a player rolls with a highlighted stat takes the guess work out of it. It’s a concrete, mechanical trigger. I don’t have to worry if I’m being biased or overly generous with the rewards for one player over another because I am not making the decision.
I very much like that.
I just had a weird thought, thank you.
How about handing out a generic Hold or two as a reward ? I think I’d make the players immediately decide who got it and for which move. This could be fun. I think I’ll call it Momentum.
I believe “XP on a miss” also encourages players to use their lower-rated abilities so they don’t always spam their favorite abilities. Plus, more misses=more drama=a more interesting game.
Yeah. It simulates learning what not to do. Makes sense.
In many pre-PbtA games, a lot more than XP was left arbitrarily up to the GM. “Rulings not rules” is the phrase.
Apocalypse World is different in that it spells out the entire system, leaving nothing arbitrary. Everything that is uncertain in the game is spelled out by move triggers. With the whole game structured, XP is just not an exception. It’s not that XP rewards are devoid of GM fiat, the whole game is.
DW has some obvious differences, trying to bridge the gap between AW and D&D, but it follows the same idea
The solution is simple: keep playing, and the imbalance will inevitably even out. That’s just what dice do. Putting pressure on the GM to arbitrarily “fix” things is unnecessary and counterproductive.
(Exception: if you’re running a one-shot, players might grumble at it, but it doesn’t really matter, anyway. Level them up at the break, regardless of XP, because that’s fun.)
I tend to look at it as a carrot that incentivizes certain behaviors, in this case, taking risks.
Also, again: in AW/DW, that is explicitly not the MC/GMs job to make that arbitrary call. (Both in the rules as written, and as intended by the designers.)
Joshua R. Leuthold Your example constitutes bad MCing in my mind. I don’t see any of the listed moves being utilized. “Force a move roll” is not a GM move available to you. While not specified, moves such as deal damage also should not be applied to a random 3rd party. You could have “Separated Them” and then the rogue could possibly defy danger to leap over the burning bed of coals (which comes with its own chance of failure and an advancement).
On top of that, you are ripping off the fighter by giving the results of his check to someone else (both the narrated move and XP). Would you ever have the fighter succeed and narrate the rogue stabbing someone? Then why would you do this on a failure?
Perhaps if your game is ending up imbalanced, the problem is the players not adapting. If you have players who are never willing to risk failure, they will fall behind. It may not be the game that needs to change, but those playing it.
steven swezey
Thanks… I think.
The specific reason noted above was actually thoroughly discussed in the thread I mentioned (here: https://plus.google.com/101846341934255246696/posts/Y3M793vdHKo ), and the example was poorly done because I was on my phone and didn’t have access to the GM moves to create a perfect one.
I’ll be sure to let my player know that the reason he can’t switch playbooks in a Masks game yet is because he’s playing the game wrong. I’m sure that will foster a wonderful conversation.
plus.google.com – Anyone replace the xp on a miss mechanic with something else? I’d like the x…
Joshua R. Leuthold I see this completely differently. The magic behind this way of awarding XP is that it is completely into the players hands to choose to do something in the fiction that will trigger a move using a low stat, hence getting a bigger chance at XP.
If you want to award XP the traditional way, you should look at others tools at your disposal.
– you can add custom moves, linked to the adventure you are running. You want to award XP for accomplishing a quest or slaying that particular dragon ? Create a custom move « when you slay the filthy swamp dragon, get x XP ».
– you can add to or customize the end of session move
– have a look at all the other ways players can get XP (alignment, class features like the monk..) to get inspired
Just be careful with the trigger. Saying « when you put another PC in trouble, get XP » can endanger the fun for eveyone quickly. Instead, prefer an end of scene move so that there is a moderation on the frequency of the trigger
If you use custom XP moves heavily, and find out PCs level too quickly, you might augment the necessary XP per level or even get rid of the award XP for 6- if the table is uncomfortable with it. I wouldn’t worry about that at first though. Leveling in DW doesn’t confer invulnerability to mundane threats like in D&D. PCs only get more options and a little more survivability sometimes.
In Masks and most pbtas, you can replace the xp per 6- rule much quickly : only 5 potentials per advancement.
Joshua R. Leuthold It’s a game that promotes risky behavior. Playing it safe is tantamount to playing it wrong. It a game about teenage drama. The guy who never fails is not doing his part and thus is not receiving the reward for it. It would be one thing if his dice were just too hot and he couldn’t fail no matter what he rolled, but I sincerely doubt that is the case.
It may not be a conversation he wants to have, but it’s one that needs to happen if he is going to get the most out of the game. XP for failure imparts a very specific flavor to the game. Change it if you want, but you’ll likely see a change in behavior from your other players.
I had a whole thing that was about rewarding XP for advancing the fiction but I deleted it because I felt it wasn’t addressing the question…then I reconsidered.
So what I had in mind was to make a list of post-session prompts, asking things like, “did you learn something,” and “did you suffer a setback”. I’m pretty sure The Sprawl has something similar.
I have to agree that the “XP on miss” mechanic is very intentional in MASKS to create the “teenage” part of the intended “teenage superheroes” genre.
If you and your group don’t aim at that anyway, you can switch this rule for another one too. Other PtbA games can give you enough examples to choose from.
But I have a feeling, that is not the primary issue. So a few questions arise:
How big is the XP gap between the players in numbers?
Is the player more passive than the others and therefore doesn’t get as many rolls (and therefore fewer chances for XP)?
A player who is simply damn lucky and rarely misses a roll can shape the narrative a lot more. The “XP on a miss” mechanic has the benefit that a player always profits from a roll, no matter the result. Maybe the players need more narrative freedom when they get successes (and therefore a feeling of a reward)?
If the player in question simply isn’t happy with their playbook, why can’t s/he simply change the character? Imho the “change your playbook” advancement is there for narrative purposes, not for the case when a player doesn’t like the playbook they’re using atm.
Over in your DW thread, William Nichols has excellent points about highlighting stats, and also there’s mention of beginning-of and end-of-session moves as xp generating mechanics. Additionally, as MC, you can use highlighting stats to give a player who’s zooming ahead a chance to chill and a player who’s stalling out catch up, xp-wise. Leaving out arbitrary “I think what you did is cool” xp supports the MC in looking around for what makes life interesting in ways that lead the players to roll dice.
Thanks for pinging me in, Meg! I’m at a con, so missing most of these right now.
Folks: it’s generally a good idea to listen to Meg. She’s got more pbta experience than most threads combined.
Also: game design is mind control. In the case of aw and it’s children, xp intentionally exist to drive behavior. Getting xp for highlighted stats? That’s intentional to let the mc direct the likely action.