Quote from: GeekEclectic;285708In an extremely limited fashion, sure. I don't know a single game with these kinds of points w/ a "fiat" option that don't put serious limits on just what can be done with them.

Of course. You want the player to have some of the GM's power for a moment, you don't want them to actually be the GM.

Quote from: GeekEclecticAs involved as GMing can be, the limited number of points in any game system along with the severely limited extent of what players can actually affect with those points makes this pretty much a non-issue.

It's simply a matter of degree. The GM has constant and unlimited fiat power, with some hero points systems the player has momentary and limited fiat power.

Quote from: GeekEclecticNot if the limits are clearly explained. I get from the OP that when he was reading the rules of games like Buffy, FATE, Conan, etc. that he skimmed past the portions that explain these limitations. As I said earlier, he's attacking an imaginary problem.

I agree. I was expanding on the ideas in the thread, rather than defending what the OP said. I'm simply saying that the fiat power of the GM is a difficult thing to use well, and in practice it's even more difficult for players.

That's because the GM has two things individual players don't: a broad view of what's happening in the campaign and in the game group, and a dedication to do what's good for the group as a whole. Players necessarily have a narrower view, and look out for themselves a lot more. Doesn't mean they're all stupid and selfish, just that simply by the nature of what roleplaying is, taking a single character and trying to bring them to life, the player has a narrower view of things.

Which means that players tend to use the fiat power of Hero Points rather less creatively than the GM uses their fiat power.

Quote from: GeekEclecticI'm sorry, but this just doesn't make sense. I don't know many GMs, especially those that have been doing it for a while, who just muddle their way through a game. And the games that have these points do give plenty of advice on their uses and limitations. "I didn't read that" isn't the same as "the advice isn't there."

You're reading me too literally, doing that internet discussion thing of picking apart individual sentences rather than looking at the general meaning.

By "muddle" I don't mean someone who has no clue at all. I mean there's a constant adjustment, it's all a real balancing act. If you've ever been bushwalking you'll understand the analogy: you can get a map and draw a straight line from A to B, but when you actually travel you find that you have to work around obstacles you didn't know were there from looking at the map, you can only see them when you come across them. You muddle along and eventually get to B, but when you look back it was very far from a straight line.

That's how GMs tend to use their fiat powers - they have general goals for the group ("have fun and introduce Bob to gaming" etc) and the campaign ("the PCs defeat the evil sorceror", etc) and they muddle along, constantly adjusting their path as they go to those final goals.

Most rpgs don't talk about this much. You'll get ten pages of gun stats, but only a paragraph or two about the GM's fiat power. Something like A Quick Primer For Old School Gaming is very useful; but we need primers for other play styles, and for general GMing, too.

Quote from: chaosvoyager;285725Ah, but for all intents in purposes it is if a player won't spend it on anything else because of the way the game works.

This is true, but then it all depends on specifics.

Anyway, does it seem possible that some of the problems that have been raised could be "fixed" by giving away lots more hero points.

Such as:

• Spending a hero point beforehand then failing, or rolling well enough that you didn't need to spend the point
• Not wanting to spend hero points on anything but avoiding killing blows.

Quote from: GeekEclectic;2856081/10 Railing against imaginary things is kind of weird. None of the games I know of that use points for narrative control allow anything even remotely as extreme as controlling enemy actions and having their weapons blow up. Not. A. Single. Game.

You must not read a lot of Forge games, then. good for you!

RPGPundit

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;285837This is true, but then it all depends on specifics.

It's not true ime, at all. what we're really talking about is what my friends and i refer to as "turtleing" as in making a shell for yourself and hiding in it. Although you can use hero points (or whatever points) for that- it is certainly not a universal player response, and never seen in my group. when I actually got to play true20, for example I used them for all kinds of shit.
there are other mechanisms in the game that can mitigate the death spiral. feats like toughness and diehard, for example.

Quote from: RPGPundit;285878You must not read a lot of Forge games, then. good for you!

I actually see a lot of indie games, and have even gotten to try out a few. Yes, even a lot with shared narration. But those games are something entirely different than what's being talked about in the OP. Things like Capes and Primetime Adventures are supposed to split up the GM duties to a large degree, and you don't need special points to do it.

Quote from: Aos;286049It's not true ime, at all. what we're really talking about is what my friends and i refer to as "turtleing" as in making a shell for yourself and hiding in it. Although you can use hero points (or whatever points) for that- it is certainly not a universal player response, and never seen in my group.

when I actually got to play true20, for example I used them for all kinds of shit.
there are other mechanisms in the game that can mitigate the death spiral. feats like toughness and diehard, for example.

Using a Conviction point for defense isn't the same thing as turtling.  Turtling implies that the character's actions are defensive.  In my True20 games, we charged forwards into combat and took on foes heroically.  It's just that in doing so, I found it much more effective to use my Conviction points on damage saves than on anything else.  

Now, your experience may be different.  I'd be curious to see about why.  

For me, the key issue with the damage save was that it was the last step in a chain, and one where the exact level of the roll is crucial.  If I reroll an attack roll, then the attack still might not have a real effect, because the enemy's damage save comes after that.  However, if I have been hit and roll poorly on my damage save, then I know for certain that I will be in for lasting penalties on all further actions.  The huge variability of damage here is important.  If I reroll a 3, I average +12.5 on my roll, where on a damage save, ten points is the difference between disabled (i.e. can't do any standard action) and no action penalties at all.

I don't know why my experience is different. I have used far more points on attack rolls than for defense. We play fairly gonzo over the top games and I guess we just don't get all that into making the most practical decision all the time. Also when somebody does something crazy cool they usually get a CP or two. What I'm really saying is I don;t think they're any more of a patch than any other rule- and unlike hit points the player has CHOICE as to how they want to use them- which can lead to some interesting conflict.

I'd be interested to see what somebody who plays savage worlds (I've only playd it acouple of times) has to say about bennies and the damage system, and how they tend to get used in play.

The players in my Mutants and Masterminds campaign most commonly use their Hero Points for rerolls or boosting their powers.  Using them to shrug off injuries would be a distant third, followed by silly things like having your character mysteriously show up with even though you missed session.  Which I wouldn't charge them for if they could think up a decent reason.

Now that I think of it, I believe it may very well be better if they were only for boosting your powers, gaining extras and stunts, not for rerolls and what not.  There would certainly be some shorter fights!

Quote from: C.Jay;286187The players in my Mutants and Masterminds campaign most commonly use their Hero Points for rerolls or boosting their powers.  Using them to shrug off injuries would be a distant third, followed by silly things like having your character mysteriously show up with even though you missed session.  Which I wouldn't charge them for if they could think up a decent reason.

Now that I think of it, I believe it may very well be better if they were only for boosting your powers, gaining extras and stunts, not for rerolls and what not.  There would certainly be some shorter fights!

Could you explain that last statement?  I can't quite tell why you're saying that fights would be shorter without rerolls.  If the rerolls were used to make attacks more successful, say, then they would make attacks more successful, and presumably lack of them would make fights last longer.

Quote from: jhkim;286310Could you explain that last statement?  I can't quite tell why you're saying that fights would be shorter without rerolls.  If the rerolls were used to make attacks more successful, say, then they would make attacks more successful, and presumably lack of them would make fights last longer.

No worries, jh.  In my experience, if you miss an attack and have some Hero Points in your pile, you may very well decide to use that point to reroll and have another chance of making an attack.  Then again, you might decide to hang onto it.  You can always make another attack next go around.

If, however, you badly fluff a Damage Save and are about to go down like a sack of shit, there's no way you're going to pass up the opportunity to use a Hero (or Villain) Point if you can.

Also, more attacking minded players tend to use their Hero Points at the start of the round (in M&M1e, you can only use one per round) to boost their powers, rather than holding back for a reroll.