Quote from: jibbajibba;628353I do this after doign objective settign for my staff at work.
I allow the PCs to have 3 active personal objectives, which must involve oversoming some challenge or conflict. Then I assign Xp rewards based on the difficulty. I usually reserve it for my amber games where individual goals are paramount.
once you acheive one you can set another or you can let one lapse and take up another.

I also take the big bad and their scheme whatever it might be and assign points for the PCs busting each section, again in Amber terms this is 1-5 XP per step where you can buy another partial power step for 5 points.
So if you uncover who is sending assasins into Amber to try and Kill the king you might get 3xp, if you uncover who is really doing it not the front org you might get 5 and chances are you already got the 3.

The problem with the later method is that you are rewarding players for following your game outline which is a bit railroady which is why i introduced the personal stuff to enable players to totally ignore my plots and the big bad and drive their own plots and agendas and still profit from it.

My MO is to allow players to set their own short term goals. They should have a reasonable chance of failure and should take long enough to qualify as a quest (more than one session). Each is worth 1 XP. I basically ripped the XP progression from Pundit's game FtA, so it's a bit less granular than vanilla D&D.

Quote from: jibbajibba;628544I find the opposite setting in game goals, "I want to become governor of Askerlan" "I intend to kill Dr Moonfleet "  etc etc ... actually creates more in character play rather than less...

I'd view it as more 'predictable' character play myself. I really enjoy goals in RPGs being personal, vague and constantly changing. It's one of the differences from wargaming that I enjoy.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;628526the idea that roleplaying games lack win and loss conditions is just weird to me. What makes them different isn't the absence of win and loss conditions, but the fact that the players all stay in the game and may win and lose several times over the course of play.

I agree completely.

I do find the insinuation that by choosing to use a simpler system with a degree of judgement I am
1. somehow wimping out on rewarding or punishing players and
2. stupid
a bit strange.

This argument's probably just a bit sophisticated for me, that's all.

Quote from: smiorgan;6285991. somehow wimping out on rewarding or punishing players and

Huh? Did I miss something?

If anything your rewarding them double, once in-game as they achieved their goal (i.e. the reach the goal) and again mechanically with extra XP.

Quote from: smiorgan;6285992. stupid
a bit strange.

I didn't think the concept that unusual. No more so than RP rewards or clever plan rewards in any case.

Quote from: beejazz;628552. Each is worth 1 XP. I basically ripped the XP progression from Pundit's game FtA, so it's a bit less granular than vanilla D&D.

To go completely off-topic, I'm really glad that worked out for you! I was very tempted to use the same system for Arrows of Indra, but its clearly not old-school enough, so I compromised and went for a single XP table for all classes.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;626777What is a good challenge of players in RPG's? I mean, usually skill and combat actions are based around stats on the sheet and die rolling. That's not a challenge of anything related to the player, but rather random chance.

Tactics.

If combat only challenges your dice-rolling, then both the DM and players are boring and stupid.

Same with all that non-combat stuff, too.

Quote from: Haffrung;628160The idea to carry out those actions in the first place comes from the players.  So the challenge to the players is to come up with effective plans to set up situations where they can use those skills.

And again, WHAT is being challenged? HOW is making those plans challenging? WHY would certain tactics be more or less effective?

Quote from: Haffrung;628160Thankfully, I couldn't give a shit what style of play is supported by the mechanics of Pathfinder.

Then what style of play is supported by YOUR methods and assumptions, because that's what the players will need to be playing to in order to overcome challenges.

Quote from: Haffrung;628160However, I've had no problems attracting and keeping players for the last 34 years.

And I've been a Programmer for 25 years. Oh wait, that doesn't matter either.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;628161Pick up a character sheet, any one will suffice and ask it how challenging X is to do?

Challenges are for the actual people playing the game, and have nothing to do with whats on a character sheet. Challenges help provide entertainment value from the game and only people can appreciate them.

Any answer from that character sheet yet? Keep waiting.

A character is a fictitious creation. It cannot appreciate the feel of a challenging endeavor. The various values on the character sheet have nothing to do with challenge. At best they can define mathematical probabilities.

That's exactly my point. All the challenges brought up in that example depended on successful skill rolls. For example, many were the equivalent of 'doing library research' which is NOT a challenge when it's just a die roll. Which brings up an interesting question, what kind of 'tactics' COULD a player use to increase their chance of success in skills like that?

Quote from: Exploderwizard;628161if an rpg does not support creative player input as a meaningful way to overcome challenges then it kind of fails at being an entertaining rpg.

Of course. But what are they being creative about?

Quote from: Haffrung;627856What do they do?

They could seek out the unsavory stablehand who introduced them to the merchant. Perhaps he knows more about this necromancer. And if they find him, they have a variety of approaches they can take: threaten him, bribe him, pretend to be in the know already about the Necromancer's plans, etc.

Or they could ask around about the origins of the tower. Who built it? They may be able to find out what sorts of perils it holds - traps, or magic, or undead - and choose their spells and resources accordingly.

How about the chalice? Can a sage tell them its purpose and powers?

They could try to raise aid from the local temple of Mitra. Or call in a favour with the local baron to provide men-at-arms.

They could stake out the tower. Post a lookout and watch for several days to see who enters or leaves.

They could ambush a courier leaving the tower and then impersonate him to get back in.

Once in the tower, they could disguise themselves as supplicants or couriers.

They could send a rogue in with invisibility and other wards to scout the layout of the dungeon and look for ways to bypass guard posts.

They could capture a guard and compel him to talk.

They could bait a nearby troll and lure it into a clash with the guard post.

They could set up wards and lure the guards into a trap.

They could whittle away the minions of the necromancer to weaken him before they attack, or they could plan a swift tactical strike to take out the necromancer alone.

etc. etc. etc.

This is all stuff that the players think of - stuff that is not represented by values, skills, and abilities on a character sheet. Any player can make these tactical and strategic suggestions - the one who plays the paladin, or the one who plays the wizard.

Amen, brother. THIS is what RPGs are about for me.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;629828And again, WHAT is being challenged? HOW is making those plans challenging? WHY would certain tactics be more or less effective?

Why is having the higher ground advantageous? Why are narrow entryways more defensible? Of what use is having greater numbers in a battle?

These are simple tactical realities. If the rules of the game don't support them then the game isn't supporting common sense.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;629828That's exactly my point. All the challenges brought up in that example depended on successful skill rolls. For example, many were the equivalent of 'doing library research' which is NOT a challenge when it's just a die roll. Which brings up an interesting question, what kind of 'tactics' COULD a player use to increase their chance of success in skills like that?

Depends on the parameters of the situation. Not everything the players do is (or needs to be) a CHALLENGE. Doing research might just require spending the requisite time in the library. If there is another factor involved, say the PCs need to research something in an hour or less or someone dies, then you have a challenge.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;629828Of course. But what are they being creative about?

Solving problems, finding answers to questions that they have come up with themselves. Not every action needs to be set up as a hoop for players to jump through with pre-set parameters. Events unfold, sometimes presenting difficult problems. Sometimes part of the fun is realizing that a problem exists in the first place.

Pre-set challenges force reactive behavior. A world in motion provides opportunity for the proactive to not only react to events but to create and  initiate them.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;629852Why is having the higher ground advantageous? Why are narrow entryways more defensible? Of what use is having greater numbers in a battle?

These are simple tactical realities. If the rules of the game don't support them then the game isn't supporting common sense.

this is a good example so long as the rules support the 'reality'

QuoteDepends on the parameters of the situation. Not everything the players do is (or needs to be) a CHALLENGE. Doing research might just require spending the requisite time in the library. If there is another factor involved, say the PCs need to research something in an hour or less or someone dies, then you have a challenge.
.

This is a bad example because all you will do is make the roll harder apply a mallus or whatever.
From a game perspective there is little different in "challenge" between roll % lower than 50 and roll % lower than 30 both are just rolling dice.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;629828That's exactly my point. All the challenges brought up in that example depended on successful skill rolls. For example, many were the equivalent of 'doing library research' which is NOT a challenge when it's just a die roll. Which brings up an interesting question, what kind of 'tactics' COULD a player use to increase their chance of success in skills like that?
]?

You would do things like explain what you are researching and how: "okay, I am going to check the town annals for anything going on in the year x", or "I look for books on dragons and try to find any reference to Vomitious the Terrible." Whether you are using an actual research skill or not, these sort of things would impact the likelihood of finding the info.

Quote from: jibbajibba;629857This is a bad example because all you will do is make the roll harder apply a mallus or whatever.
From a game perspective there is little different in "challenge" between roll % lower than 50 and roll % lower than 30 both are just rolling dice.

I think you misunderstand.

I'm saying that if there isn't any "challenging" circumstance such as a time limit then there is no roll. Time passes and research happens.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;629858You would do things like explain what you are researching and how: "okay, I am going to check the town annals for anything going on in the year x", or "I look for books on dragons and try to find any reference to Vomitious the Terrible." Whether you are using an actual research skill or not, these sort of things would impact the likelihood of finding the info.

Better example.
The best would be to have determined where the data was to be found say for example there is an article in the Town Chricle paper the day before the fire. If the PCs choose to look at that they needn't make a roll other wise you modify for what they decide to look at based on relevance but you need to be flexible.

i ran a detective game and the PCs were investing a murder a religious nut was killing members of a local wiccan covern. Now the hard thing was supposed to be discovering the links between the murders because the who thing was secret. However one of the PCc decided to pull all the phone records on the first victim and quickly got a list of contacts and when another one was killed the whole of my clever plot unravelled. They still had to find the murderer but I hadn't logically thought about how they would arrange meetings etc until he pointed out the obvious use of the telephone.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;629860I think you misunderstand.

I'm saying that if there isn't any "challenging" circumstance such as a time limit then there is no roll. Time passes and research happens.

No I understood. You misunderstood Anon's point. It was that rolling a skill check whether its +10% -30% etc etc is just rollign a dice and not a challenging thing to do.
There has to be some input from the players to make it challenging.

Quote from: jibbajibba;629861Better example.
The best would be to have determined where the data was to be found say for example there is an article in the Town Chricle paper the day before the fire. If the PCs choose to look at that they needn't make a roll other wise you modify for what they decide to look at based on relevance but you need to be flexible.

Absolutely. I was assuming that was the case and just giving it from the pc perspective. From the GM point of view I never ask for a roll if they a precise and correct. Though I would also be open to suggestions from the PCs I hadnt thought of if they make sense (for example I may decide the information is definitely found in the Town Chronicle but if they ask for old Lady Milligan's diary, who was alive and the time, I would give it to them without a roll a well (albeit from Mrs. milligan's pov).

Quotei ran a detective game and the PCs were investing a murder a religious nut was killing members of a local wiccan covern. Now the hard thing was supposed to be discovering the links between the murders because the who thing was secret. However one of the PCc decided to pull all the phone records on the first victim and quickly got a list of contacts and when another one was killed the whole of my clever plot unravelled. They still had to find the murderer but I hadn't logically thought about how they would arrange meetings etc until he pointed out the obvious use of the telephone.

This happened in one of my terror network games. I overlooked the phone records issue and a player suprised me by going that route. It made sense that the clues he wanted would be in there, so they tracked down the suspects almost right away. I am fine with that in an investigative adventure, because I think you are challenging the players directly and should honor smart decisions.