Variety is the Spice of - BRIBES!

[Supplanter]

I play this game and I run this game, two separate campaigns. So I see Watchers worrying about players "grubbing for dice" - e.g. by always trying to shoehorn in every power set, or always trying to use their highest power trait within a set - and I sympathize with the my fellow Watchers. I see players grubbing for dice, and I sympathize with my fellow players. I've looked at MHRP from both sides now, and up and down and still somehow etc. And I am an artsy-fartsy pretentious sort of gamer, regardless, so I want to see Spider-Man take actions that don't involve his web-shooters, as happens all the time in the comics. I want Captain America to just haul off and kick somebody now and then, without using his shield, as happens all the time in the comics. And so on.

In another thread we're chewing over whether we (they) can prevent players from grubbing for their most, best dice, or shame them (us) out of it, or whether we (they) should just roll with it. I think I have a better idea:

Pay people.

Use a reward instead of a behavior. If you roll a sub-max die from one of your Power Sets, take an XP. If you skip rolling a die from a Power Set entirely - not because it's Shut Down, but just because for crying out loud, enough with the adamantium claws already - take a Plot Point*. Or something. I'm open to other reward options+. Make players want to mix things up a bit. We already do that with other aspects of the game, to great effect.


Jim

* No, I do not care that this is every bit as good for the player as rolling a D4 Distinction while making it less likely that the player's roll generates a Doom Die. I suspect somewhat smaller Doom Pools make for a better gamel.

+ No, there's no "sauce for the Watcher" option here. You do NOT get a new Doom Die for rolling fewer dice than you could. I mean, obviously I'm not going to come to your house and stop you from doing it that way, but I think it's a bad idea.

[Doc Hydrogen]

I've played and run Marvel Heroic a few times as well, but I take a different angle entirely. I've played other games where I tried to bribe players to evoke particular actions, and it simply failed in a glorious crash and burn fiasco (and not the good kind).

I don't read scenes in comics where Cap just decks a guy or Spidey boots someone as mechanical bits that much. Two things to consider...

1. I read those as narrative finishers. The guy's already at d12 stress and is about to drop anyway, so the "player" just belts him one, putting him out.

2. Marvel Heroic isn't a 1-for-1 game. There's no complex action economy to worry about. Describing your character's actions as "Cap wheels through the battlefield, dodging bullets and blocking rockets with his shield. When he reaches Baron Zemo, Cap hauls off and decks him one." That's a single action (roll), that uses the shield as part of the dice pool, but the attack is pure old school right cross.

What you need is for the players and Watchers to loosen the reigns a bit and let go of the tighter game system mind set. That's not the kind of description that's rewarded with a plot point, that's the kind of description you should expect as the baseline, and that is rewarded... with those fat dice you're trying to avoid.

[Spatula]

I kinda agree with Supplanter here.

The comic-book Spider-Man rarely uses his webs when attacking someone. When he arrives in a scene he might deliver a kick via swingline, but after that he typically only uses his webbing to restrain, blind, or disarm. Anyone who's using both of Spider-Man's power sets to attack and/or defend every action/reaction isn't really being true to the character, and I think it's a minor flaw in the system that it basically encourages a Spider-Man armed with a web club and a web shield. However, I think that's the nature of the beast with a less regimented system such as this. Spider-Man's player should show some restraint to play the character "right", but if the Watcher has to bribe him to do so, so be it.

You can see this also with, say, Black Widow, who is going to fire her wrist things at range but rely on her martial arts when up-close. But a min/max player will always be working the wrist weapons into each action somehow to get that extra D8, which strains credulity.

On the other hand, with some heroes like Cap or Daredevil, it's easier to narrate actions to include both power sets without looking different from what you see in the comics.

I think the issue is with players looking at the datafile and trying to figure out how to maximize the die pool first, and narrate their action second. I think the game will be more interesting if such players focus on roleplaying or the story first, and then look to the datafile to see which dice to use.

[Supplanter]

It occurs to me there's an even simpler rules tweak to solve the "Black Widow problem." Instead of one free applicable power trait from each power set per action roll, make it two free applicable power traits total from whatever sets per action roll.

Impact of this change on the game as a package is minimal. Maybe you ditch the Multipower FX, but that's no great loss. (I've played Ms. Marvel and Luke Cage.) Keep Versatile for characters with only one plausibly offensive power. Maybe Versatile becomes, "Works like in the book, OR, instead of stepping your trait die down and multiplying it, keep it the same size and add a free push die." So Cyclops, with Eyebeams D10, can roll 2D8, 3D6, or D10+D6.

This is just another way of formalizing the tacit expectation that each player hero will get to roll two power-trait dice per action or reaction. And it lets Daredevil choose among combining his Reflexes and Senses, his Senses and Billy Club etc.

Then I'd still keep the "sub-optimal dice" reward.


Jim

[Cam]

Given that there are no d4s in Power Sets generally, you could always allow players to take a d4 + PP in lieu of using a power trait. This functions exactly like a Distinction used negatively, still gives you a die from the extra Power Set (as opposed to simply not taking one), and adds not only a PP for sure but a good chance of getting another one (from the potential opportunity on the d4).

Don't hand out XP for not using the power, you crazy people.

Cheers,
Cam

[Supplanter]

Given that there are no d4s in Power Sets generally, you could always allow players to take a d4 + PP in lieu of using a power trait. This functions exactly like a Distinction used negatively, still gives you a die from the extra Power Set (as opposed to simply not taking one), and adds not only a PP for sure but a good chance of getting another one (from the potential opportunity on the d4).

That's a thought. It seems like a nice alternative for the "Doom Pools should be big!" school of Watchers. I think I like the two free power traits regardless of set tweak better than either last night's idea or this, though.

Don't hand out XP for not using the power, you crazy people.

Heh. That was actually never a suggestion. It was "hand out XP for using a different power." That one's still on the table.


Jim

[MidnightBlue]

I've played and run Marvel Heroic a few times as well, but I take a different angle entirely. I've played other games where I tried to bribe players to evoke particular actions, and it simply failed in a glorious crash and burn fiasco (and not the good kind).

I don't read scenes in comics where Cap just decks a guy or Spidey boots someone as mechanical bits that much. Two things to consider...

1. I read those as narrative finishers. The guy's already at d12 stress and is about to drop anyway, so the "player" just belts him one, putting him out.

2. Marvel Heroic isn't a 1-for-1 game. There's no complex action economy to worry about. Describing your character's actions as "Cap wheels through the battlefield, dodging bullets and blocking rockets with his shield. When he reaches Baron Zemo, Cap hauls off and decks him one." That's a single action (roll), that uses the shield as part of the dice pool, but the attack is pure old school right cross.

What you need is for the players and Watchers to loosen the reigns a bit and let go of the tighter game system mind set. That's not the kind of description that's rewarded with a plot point, that's the kind of description you should expect as the baseline, and that is rewarded... with those fat dice you're trying to avoid.

This is a bit more in line with my thoughts on the matter, though I can definitely see both sides. Of course the other thing to remember is that every play group is different so there probably (definitely) isn't just one "right" answer.

Still, I'm right there with you Doc.

I've tried to encourage, bribe, threaten players into a specific mindset or approach to a game before and it has never worked to my benefit or the benefit of the game.

I'm also not going to tell them how to play their characters. If Spidey wants to use his web shooters all the time, as long as he can narrate the action, I'm not going to stop him...well...until he runs out of web fluid in a critical moment (happens all the time in the comics...or at least it use to). If Wolvie wants to *snikt* out the claws in every scene...more power to him...well...until he kills a few too many people and SHIELD gets called in to investigate his homicidal tendencies that is.

I guess what I'm saying, is that as long as the players work to narrate what they want to do, then I'm not going to stop them. Although I can't say there won't be in-game consequences that they might have to deal with further down the road. Character actions are in the player's hands. The consequences of those actions are in my hands.

My only form of directing their actions will come from the strong encouragement that the better the players' narration and roleplay, the more likely I'll allow the use of those big dice pools that they are going for. If I can't "see" what they are trying to do, then I won't feel moved to allow dice inclusion.

And besides...if I feel that the players have an unfair or overpowering advantage, I'm the Watcher. I can always step up the threat level of the Doom Pool and beef up the NPC's heading their way.

That is my sadistic right and guilty pleasure in running a game. I get to make the player characters' lives...interesting.

[Supplanter]

I've played other games where I tried to bribe players to evoke particular actions, and it simply failed in a glorious crash and burn fiasco (and not the good kind).

Ooh, I want to hear about this! Please tell some.

Thanks,


Jim

[Doc Hydrogen]

I've played other games where I tried to bribe players to evoke particular actions, and it simply failed in a glorious crash and burn fiasco (and not the good kind).

Ooh, I want to hear about this! Please tell some.

Thanks,

Jim

Not much to tell, really, but I'll bite.

D&D 4E, wanted the players to be more descriptive than "I use X power on Y target, and move Z squares to here" every round. So I offered up an action point for anything more descriptive than the above or "I hit it". It lasted two rounds, with two players trying in once, and one player trying it twice. Then they stopped using it entirely. When I reminded them about it I was pelted with chips and taunted for trying to run "some narrativist pap" instead of D&D. It was a low point, but at least I got another TPK out of it. Score one for the DM; suck it players!

[MidnightBlue]

Ouch Doc.

I feel your pain.

I was trying to run a spooky, suspense-filled episode for a Star Wars game. The players' ship was sabotaged while they were landed and making repairs on a spooky, abandoned, asteroid mining facility.

While the party was split up, two investigating the scary facility, the other two making repairs on the ship, the two on the ship tried to figure out who sabotaged their repairs. Eventually, via internal security feeds, the two on ship discovered that one of THEM (the wookiee) had actually sabotaged the ship. The wookiee PC had no memory of doing what the video showed.

The other PC (the droid) exhausted his resources in determining if the feed had been tampered with, if another wookiee had got on board or if there was a shapeshifter or something else on board. All avenues proved unenlightening. As far as the PC's knew, the wookie among them had sabotaged that ship.

Instead of latching onto the horror and suspence of the situation, they simply ignored it. Their reasoning seemed quite meta. The player who was playing the wookiee didn't know anything about the sabotage that he was supposed to have performed, so he couldn't have done it. So it had to be another cause. Basically, the players chose to ignore everything that their skill rolls and GM narration had told them.

I tried to ask leading questions and steer the PC's toward the suspencefulness of the setting...but they weren't biting.

At first I tried to push the players where I wanted and found myself getting a little annoyed. I'd set this part of the scenario up as a pseudo-horror (aka John Carpenter's The Thing) segment. I'd gone to great efforts to make the PC's start to look at each other sideways. But it was a no-go.

Finally, I just had to realize that the players were going to latch onto whatever entertained them. Clearly, I hadn't sold the suspence and horror atmosphere...at least not well enough for them to bite onto. That was my shortcoming, not theirs.

So...I stopped trying to force a situation and let the players steer the game where THEY were happy and entertained.

I think things started going more smoothly after that.