Not a system, because I don't live in Cambridge any more and couldn't run one, but a structure in which one could be written, in case any of the people writing systems like it.
What I like about XP
- I like watching my numbers getting bigger. Diablo shouldn't be addictive, but it was.
- I like lots of people turning up to larps, and I think XP is an added motivation to get out of the house on days when you're feeling a bit low and wondering about just staying in.
- I quite like character creation minigames.
- I like the feeling that my Hero is getting More Powerful.
What I don't like about XP
- I do not like power differentials at all. A starting PC should be as mechanically powerful, or almost as mechanically powerful, as an established one. Yes, I know this directly contradicts one of the above.
- I do not like people having to play character creation minigames. It should be possible to ignore them completely.
XP system
Your character has Kits, Powers and Backgrounds.
A kit grants you your bread-and-butter stuff. For example:
- Warrior: +5 hits, +1 damage grade
- Mage: +5 mana per encounter, inflict magic damage by blow, pick three spells from the mage Spell list.
A power is a powerful one-use ability, either per day or per encounter. The intent is that all per day, and all per-encounter, powers are of roughly equal value (or possibly that some are roughly twice or three times as good as the baseline). For example,
- Ignore any on status effect.
- Fully heal one of your locations.
Backgrounds are much less mechanically powerful, but provide colour and downtime utility. For example:
- Noble: extra status and money.
- Scholar: read languages and similar discerns.
- Priest: perform rites.
- Ritualist: perform rituals.
- Rogue: disguise, conceal item etc.
- Wilderness: limited soft-skill camouflage, discerns, talk to animals etc.
At any given time, your character can have (e.g.) two kits active; every character can use e.g. two powers per encounter and five per day. All backgrounds apply at all times. Swapping kits take about 5 minutes as you e.g. take off your armour and pick up a staff. You can use any of your powers at any time, and can use the same one repeatedly.
A starting character knows a small number of kits and powers, and a background or two - enough that they can fill all their slots, but not enough for much versatility. XP can be used to learn more. So a higher-XP character is more likely to have the right answer to a given situation than a lower-XP one, and will have more background tags (possibly at higher level, if they stack) but the low-XP character is still just as competent within their field.
Jacob
- I think another point in favour of XP is it means character creation can be simpler. TT chargen is horrible, but it would be worse if everyone started at L8. More numbers to manage. Starting with a more limited set of skills allows you to learn the rules for your PC and how to use their stuff. You then get regular inputs of new Stuff to play around with. As opposed to having this big menu of options to start, which can look bewildering. --Jim
Here's a completely different way to address part of the issue: System-wide XP. Say we have a broadly TT-like rules structure and progression, where you can get about 10xp a week or whatever.
So, 8xp per week is free. Every single character accrues this, even unplayed ones - a new character started on week 3 will have 174 xp, not 150.
Featuring in uptime gains you a bonus XP point, so you can earn up to 10 per week by interactivating and also linearing. You can earn one per character played, or one for monstering, from an interactive. Linears award one to both players and monsters.
You now have: Incentives to come larp. Numbers go up. And a severely minimised "new characters are dwarfed by old ones" situation.
--Tea
- I have a thought for a tweak on that, using a 20-Interactive a year example. New characters start on 100XP whenever they are created. You gain 10XP a week as per Tea's idea. The XP limit is 250XP. Characters will relatively swiftly progress from Newbie to Maximum. I feel this way may require a character limit unlike Tea's idea. Otherwise there's an incentive to start 5 PCs and bench 3 of them so they'll accrue XP without ever featuring. This would mean there would be a decent range of PC power levels, since if you don't have that, why have Numbers Go Up in the first place? I think it's ideal that you can hit the top power level in under a year, as it means that nothing feels wildly out of reach on a new character. What I like about XP for absent PCs is it means that even if you can only play occasionally, you can still stick at a similar power level to IC mates. meaning linears balance better to a party as opposed to having one PC be a healing sink. -Jim
- Note that in my version benching characters does nothing over just introducing them later. Note that 'a new character started on week 3 will still have 174 xp'. There is literally no incentive to generate and not play a PC to rack up XP, over just generating them later in the year when you actually want to play them... --Tea
- Yes, I mentioned that. -Jim
- Note that my objective was explicitly to avoid a "decent range" of PC power levels, and to enable starting PCs to compete on equal - or at least, less unequal - terms with established ones. --Jacob
- Power levels = number of kits. Bear in mind that the XP system I suggested would work just fine with your "kit" system. You start with one kit, and by the XP Cap you have say 6/10 Kits available. I think that limiting how many options a PC can have is good because it means there's always something you have to let someone else solve. Otherwise instead of "High level PC can overpower problem" it's "High-level PC always has a solution". Also if you ultimately gain the ability to do anything, it dilutes the concept you started with. If there's not some level of inequality in PCs, then I am not sure what XP gain actually brings to a game unless you're explicitly running a plot with stronger and stronger antagonists. I think you'd need to have varied skills as opposed to More Damage ones or it will just feel like QUAD=SINGLE because it still takes 5 hits to drop the Upgraded Mk 3 Goblins, whereas when you fought Mk 1 Goblins they took 5 SINGLEs. -Jim
Oddly enough, I want a termly rejig of starting xp in Orphans, sort of like what Insurrection did (though it happened quite late). --dp
- Does this mean there will be a termly rejig of monster stats and is it going to be awkward to fit IC reasoning to why all the monsters are notably stronger than 6 months ago? (I think this might be kind of what Jacob is takling about below) --Chevron
- In the right game, with a scripted year or two-year duration, that's a feature, not a bug: the game tells the story of the development and resolution of a crisis; at the start you're fighting minor minions of darkness and as time passes more powerful ones start turning up. But obviously it would be fatal for a game on an open-ended timescale. --Jacob
Hmm, that's an interesting idea I haven't seen before. It sounds ideal for a game with a relatively short, defined story arc where you want the characters to grow in scope as the ploy thickens, but clearly wouldn't work for anything open-ended. It also means that you can't afford a system with a "golden zone", and it's harder to build one without than one with, I think. --Jacob
Personally I really like Jacob's version where you don't gain absolute power via XP, just more flexibility. Puts me in mind of original Guild Wars, where any character could have up to X skills active at a time, but an experienced character would have more options to choose from. You still get a 'numbers go up' feeling, but new characters are still good. --TimB
- That is why Guild Wars remains one of my favourite RPGs. You buy choice and complexity as opposed to absolute power, so as you progress, you get more game because you have new ways to solve problems and can try new approaches like. Stops you getting bored with a PC who's just getting Better at Swording for example. -Jim
A second thought: this probably lends itself to powerful-but-narrow powers. "Do horrible thing to undead/demon/elemental etc". "Against an opponent who is using a sword/mace/pole weapon, disarm them/ignore one of their "by blow" effects"/ something else". "$nasty thing by arrow". I'm not sure how to fit poison/disease/curse curing into this framework - perhaps have a sequence of powers "cure $effecttype n$, and removing an effect requires you to use cures 1 to n on it in sequence. So if we were limiting to (e.g.) 2 per-encounter powers per encounter and 5 per-day powers per day, cure 1 and 2 would be per encounter, 3-7 would be per day, and 8 would require special means. --Jacob