Post by Rigil Kent on Dec 20, 2004 17:10:40 GMT -6
Seeing as to how the GH: DB campaign is on hiatus, it occurred to me that this is an excellent time to resolve my ongoing problems with the Fate Point system. I have two proposals I wish to put before the group as a replacement.
First, Action Points. Culled from the Eberron campaign setting, these are fairly close to the action point mechanic in d20 Modern. A character can spend an action point to improve the result of an attack roll, a skill check, an ability check, a level check, or a saving throw. When you spend an action point, you add the results of a 1d6 (>7th lvl, 2d6 for 8th-14th lvl, 3d6 for 15th-20th, and 4d6 for 20th plus) to your d20 roll. You can declare that you are spending an action point after you have rolled the d20 but before the DM reveals the result of the roll (i.e., whether the roll succeeded or failed.) You can't use an AP if you are taking a 10 or 20. Only 1 AP can be used in a round. At 1st level, one has 5 APs. Each time a character levels, he/she gains a fresh supply of APs equal to 5 + 1/2 character level rounded down.
Also, instead of altering the result of a d20 roll, you can use an AP to automatically Stabilize with the expenditure of an AP.
Last Edit: Dec 21, 2004 14:00:59 GMT -6 by Rigil Kent
Post by Rigil Kent on Dec 20, 2004 17:16:47 GMT -6
Second, Hero Points. Pulled from Arcana Unearthed, these are closer in nature to the current FP system. On his turn, before determining the success or failure of an action, a player can use a hero point to help accomplish the action. Normally, the hero point adds a bonus of +20 to the action. However, there are exceptions:
1. If used with an attack roll, and the attack roll would have succeed without the hero point, the hero point doubles the damage inflicted by the attack OR allows the PC to make a "called shot," inflicting a special effect like: * A strike to a foe's eyes that blinds her for 1d10+4 rounds * A strike to a foe's head that stuns her for 1d3 rounds * A strike to a foe's limb that renders it useless for 1d6 rounds
2. If a character uses a hero point to act when it is not his turn, he can take a normal round's worth of actions out of the normal initiative sequence with no special bonuses. He then returns to his normal initiative count.
3. If used when a character is being attacked by either a physical attack, a spell, or some other threat, the hero point can be used to add a +1d20 luck bonus to AC or to a saving throw. If used with a saving throw for half damage or partial effect, if the PC would have made the save without the help of the hero point, he takes no damage.
4. If used when a die roll determines that the character will die, the PC avoids death and instead suffers a great and debilitating injuring determined by the DM - the character gains a scar, loses a hand, loses an eye, gains a limp and so on. This is the only case when a hero point can be used after the result of an action is determined.
5. A character can use a hero point to make something work in a way the rules normally do not allow. This requires careful DM adjudication and can be rejected. For example, a monk might try to use a hero point not only to disarm a foe but to send the weapon sailing into the hand of a nearby ally.
If this option is selected, PCs will have the following count: Aislyn: 4 Ashlyn: 3 Cyrus: 3 Gilthoron: 4 Kheldane: 4 Nival: 2
Last Edit: Dec 20, 2004 17:17:12 GMT -6 by Rigil Kent
The main pro behind Hero points, as I see them here, is that they are more flexible.
Action points seem more cut and dried, a simpler to adjudicate. For the simple reason that they'd probably speed slow gameplay down less, I might vote for those, but the flexibility of Hero Points is nice.
If I were a GM, I'd go with Action points. If I were a player, I'd want hero points, because you never know what you're going to be able to talk your GM into.
Just the $.02 from an "inactive" player.
"That man lives best who's fain to live half mad, half sane." -Flemish Poet Jan Van Stijevoort, 1524.
I like version 2 better...it's a bit more flexible, and I like that if you would've suceeded without the HP you get some other kind of benefit. I don't like the usage that allows you to take a full turn's action in the middle of the sequence...maybe it could let you change your Initiative result, or take a single action instead?
Last Edit: Dec 23, 2004 10:45:27 GMT -6 by Gigermann
Notice: If you find yourself feeling offended by something I've written, it is extremely unlikely that I actually intended any such offense—please allow me the benefit of doubt before you respond. If you still feel the need respond to a perceived insult, please let me know, in specific, how I could have rewritten my post in an unoffensive manner.
Ok...I like the hero point system, but when do you acquire more of them? I think the action point system is easier, but the Hero Point system is more flexible. I cast my vote for the Hero Point System.
Post by Rigil Kent on Jan 19, 2005 10:21:59 GMT -6
From Arcana Unearthed
Awarding Hero Points The most important thing to remember about hero points is that awarding them to PCs, or not awarding them, is totally up to the DM. Some characters may never earn a single hero point, while others, over the course of the campaign, may earn many. Some whole campaigns may never use hero points, while in others they are common. The DM is encouraged to be parsimonious with them.
Hero points should be awarded at the end or beginning of a game session, when experience points are dispersed.
A character should never earn a hero point performing an action in which he uses a hero point.