|
Post by savagedaddy on Feb 23, 2013 15:04:09 GMT -8
I've come to a conclusion about GM Bennies in my Savage Worlds games. Depending on the 'style' of game and setting I run it basically comes down to two options
Option A 1. I don't give myself any GM Bennies at the start of the game 2. Re-rolling 'snake eye' critical failures costs 2 Bennies, which go to the GM 3. I only use my GM Bennies for Soak rolls, or to recover from Shaken
I sometimes use multi-level Bennies (inspired by Deadlands Fate Chips). In these games...
Option B: 1. I don't give myself any GM Bennies at the start of the game. 2. Bennies with rewards above normal SW Bennies, go to the GM when spent by the player 3. GM may spend a Benny to activate a player's Hindrance at the worst time, to the his disadvantage or the detriment of the party. The player may refuse by paying the GM a Benny. If the player accepts, he gets the GM Benny Immediately 4. I only use GM Bennies to Soak damage or automatically recover from Shaken. I've done this in several games now and it works well.
Players not only seem to become extremely cautious about spending Bennies to re-roll critical failures or gain combat advantages, they become down right 'paranoid' about doing so.
For example, in a recent game the party's de facto leader spent Bennies to win a Persuasion roll that convinced five armed gunmen (GM NPCs) to cease fire and let them retreat if they threw down their weapons.
It was going well for the party until...
I held up a Benny and said, "Your character has the Arrogant Hindrance. You're compelled to dominate and humiliate opponents to prove you are the 'best' and can snatch victory any time you wish. You're thinking about picking up the weapon at your feet and unloading on their leader".
Everyone at the table gasped and did an immediate face palm. They were outgunned, low on ammo, and each had at least one Wound. They started reasoning and pleading with the player to pay his last Benny and get the fuck out of there alive!
The player took my Benny, picked up his weapon -- forcing everyone else to as well -- and all hell broke loose. They survived, just barely.
When they asked why he did it he said, "Because! That's one less Benny for the NPCs, Bitches".
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Feb 25, 2013 6:40:28 GMT -8
I've come to a conclusion about GM Bennies in my Savage Worlds games. Depending on the 'style' of game and setting I run it basically comes down to two options Option A 1. I don't give myself any GM Bennies at the start of the game 2. Re-rolling 'snake eye' critical failures costs 2 Bennies, which go to the GM 3. I only use my GM Bennies for Soak rolls, or to recover from Shaken I sometimes use multi-level Bennies (inspired by Deadlands Fate Chips). In these games... Option B: 1. I don't give myself any GM Bennies at the start of the game. 2. Bennies with rewards above normal SW Bennies, go to the GM when spent by the player 3. GM may spend a Benny to activate a player's Hindrance at the worst time, to the his disadvantage or the detriment of the party. The player may refuse by paying the GM a Benny. If the player accepts, he gets the GM Benny Immediately 4. I only use GM Bennies to Soak damage or automatically recover from Shaken. I've done this in several games now and it works well. Players not only seem to become extremely cautious about spending Bennies to re-roll critical failures or gain combat advantages, they become down right 'paranoid' about doing so. For example, in a recent game the party's de facto leader spent Bennies to win a Persuasion roll that convinced five armed gunmen (GM NPCs) to cease fire and let them retreat if they threw down their weapons. It was going well for the party until... I held up a Benny and said, "Your character has the Arrogant Hindrance. You're compelled to dominate and humiliate opponents to prove you are the 'best' and can snatch victory any time you wish. You're thinking about picking up the weapon at your feet and unloading on their leader". Everyone at the table gasped and did an immediate face palm. They were outgunned, low on ammo, and each had at least one Wound. They started reasoning and pleading with the player to pay his last Benny and get the fuck out of there alive! The player took my Benny, picked up his weapon -- forcing everyone else to as well -- and all hell broke loose. They survived, just barely. When they asked why he did it he said, "Because! That's one less Benny for the NPCs, Bitches". I like this idea. One thing, I don't allow people to bennie out of snake eyes. We've been doing it this way for a while, and we were playing under the idea that this was the official rule but as I'm going back over the rules I'm not finding anything that actually says that. I like it in that it makes a point where you have to live with the consequences no matter what. I very much like the very Fate-esque practice of using a bennie to "tag" a character's hindrances. In Fate the gm can use a Fate point to tag a character's aspect and basically give them stress. They can either take the stress (and they get the Fate point) or they can refuse it and not. (Note: I'm not an expert at Fate I've only played it a couple of times, someone who is an expert will most likely have a much better explanation.) Cheers, JiB
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2013 11:51:56 GMT -8
Not an expert on FATE but I do love the system and have a bit of experience with it so here is my understanding of the rule.
In FATE it actually works exactly like Savage Daddy explained the his Benny rule. The GM can compel a players aspect to cause a complication in their actions. If they accept it they get a FATE point but will have some complication happen either with a minus to the next roll or simply in RP.
For example I ran a game where a character was an Ogre with the aspect "Mighty Girth". That player ran onto a rope bridge chasing a bad guy. I compelled his aspect saying he weighed to much for the bridge. He could have payed me to nulify that but instead accepted the FATE point and the bridge broke underneath his bulk sending him, two guards, and another player tumbling down.
In another game a player was attempting to leap from a plane onto a rope hanging from a dirigible. I compelled their "Like a Rock" aspect saying that like a rock they aren't very graceful. They took the complication and had a -2 to the acrobatics roll they were attempting.
Also much like playing to your Hindrances in Savage Worlds, a player can compel their own aspect to take a complication and gain a FATE point.
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Feb 25, 2013 11:55:24 GMT -8
Not an expert on FATE but I do love the system and have a bit of experience with it so here is my understanding of the rule. In FATE it actually works exactly like Savage Daddy explained the his Benny rule. The GM can compel a players aspect to cause a complication in their actions. If they accept it they get a FATE point but will have some complication happen either with a minus to the next roll or simply in RP. For example I ran a game where a character was an Ogre with the aspect "Mighty Girth". That player ran onto a rope bridge chasing a bad guy. I compelled his aspect saying he weighed to much for the bridge. He could have payed me to nulify that but instead accepted the FATE point and the bridge broke underneath his bulk sending him, two guards, and another player tumbling down. In another game a player was attempting to leap from a plane onto a rope hanging from a dirigible. I compelled their "Like a Rock" aspect saying that like a rock they aren't very graceful. They took the complication and had a -2 to the acrobatics roll they were attempting. Also much like playing to your Hindrances in Savage Worlds, a player can compel their own aspect to take a complication and gain a FATE point. Much clearer and more lucid than my explanation. Thank you. JiB
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2013 12:24:40 GMT -8
At the beginning of the game 20 white, 10 red and 5 blue bennies are put into the pool and everyone draws blindly both at the beginning of the game for their bennies and when they are awarded bennies. The gm can only use white bennies so if he draws a red or blue they go back into the pool and he draws again. JiB, this isn't true! GMs can use any Benny they want! Except for the Legend Chips...
|
|
HyveMynd
Supporter
Dirty hippie, PbtA, Fate, & Cortex Prime <3er
Posts: 2,273
Preferred Game Systems: PbtA, Cortex Plus, Fate, Ubiquity
Currently Playing: Monsterhearts 2
Currently Running: The Sprawl
Favorite Species of Monkey: None
|
Post by HyveMynd on Mar 5, 2013 18:52:38 GMT -8
You realize what you guys did with your "GM can 'activate' a PC's Hinderance by offering the player a Bennie" house rule, right?
You turned the game into something resembling Ubiquity. Bam. ;D
I've only played FATE twice (and probably incorrectly, too) but never really liked the "I'll give you a cookie if you do what I say" aspect of compels. It felt too, I don't know. Raliroady for my tastes. Ubiquity does away with that by essentially only having self compels. If a character has the Arrogant Flaw and acts in such a way as to complicate the story, the player notifies the GM and gets a Style Point. Of course the GM is the final arbitrator of what counts as "complicating" the story.
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Mar 6, 2013 6:17:36 GMT -8
You realize what you guys did with your "GM can 'activate' a PC's Hinderance by offering the player a Bennie" house rule, right? You turned the game into something resembling Ubiquity. Bam. ;D I've only played FATE twice (and probably incorrectly, too) but never really liked the "I'll give you a cookie if you do what I say" aspect of compels. It felt too, I don't know. Raliroady for my tastes. Ubiquity does away with that by essentially only having self compels. If a character has the Arrogant Flaw and acts in such a way as to complicate the story, the player notifies the GM and gets a Style Point. Of course the GM is the final arbitrator of what counts as "complicating" the story. It's actually not, "If you do what I say/want." It's more like, "I'll give you a cookie if you take this complication to what you want to do as part of it." The distinction is pretty important because the gm isn't driving the story she's throwing obstacles in the path of the players. Cheers, JiB
|
|
|
Post by shadrack on Mar 6, 2013 8:11:44 GMT -8
I've only played FATE twice (and probably incorrectly, too) but never really liked the "I'll give you a cookie if you do what I say" aspect of compels. It felt too, I don't know. Raliroady for my tastes. Ubiquity does away with that by essentially only having self compels. If a character has the Arrogant Flaw and acts in such a way as to complicate the story, the player notifies the GM and gets a Style Point. Of course the GM is the final arbitrator of what counts as "complicating" the story. This is also called a "self-compel" in FATE. While it's not the 'only' compel, it is the compel the players are in charge of. Also, when the GM offers a compel to the player, there are options that the player has. 1) buy it off, 2) accept as proposed by the GM, or 3) negotiate with the GM. While I consider 1 a bit boring, 2 to be worthy, I think the real magic of FATE happens with #3. The GM doesn't have a monopoly in obstacle construction in FATE games. In particularly awesome feats of screwing over oneself and one's comrades I have given out 2 FATE chips.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2013 15:41:15 GMT -8
I had similar thoughts and I just limited the amount of Bennies I would use for a particular villain. Also, limit the amount you use for soak, because nothing spawns a defeatist attitude in players more than trying to hit a monster for 5 rounds and finally connecting, then having it Bennied away. Have the mooks be more dangerous, often my players went through them like butter, so Bennies made them a reasonable threat. Make your villains use Bennies for "special effects" most of the time the players won't complain that you make a power have a neat twist, if it costs the villain a Benny.
|
|
HyveMynd
Supporter
Dirty hippie, PbtA, Fate, & Cortex Prime <3er
Posts: 2,273
Preferred Game Systems: PbtA, Cortex Plus, Fate, Ubiquity
Currently Playing: Monsterhearts 2
Currently Running: The Sprawl
Favorite Species of Monkey: None
|
Post by HyveMynd on Mar 6, 2013 18:21:23 GMT -8
It's actually not, "If you do what I say/want." It's more like, "I'll give you a cookie if you take this complication to what you want to do as part of it." The distinction is pretty important because the gm isn't driving the story she's throwing obstacles in the path of the players. Cheers, JiB I totally get that, and realize that nothing is wrong with the system. To be cliche here, it's not you, it's me. I don't really care for the nature of FATE-style GM Compels any more than the awarding of Bennies in Savage Worlds. Maybe I'm wrong here, but it's entirely up to the GM when they want to Compel someone, or to hand out a Bennie. Yes, there are guidelines about when to do so, they're just too vague for my tastes.
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Mar 7, 2013 6:28:04 GMT -8
It's actually not, "If you do what I say/want." It's more like, "I'll give you a cookie if you take this complication to what you want to do as part of it." The distinction is pretty important because the gm isn't driving the story she's throwing obstacles in the path of the players. Cheers, JiB I totally get that, and realize that nothing is wrong with the system. To be cliche here, it's not you, it's me. I don't really care for the nature of FATE-style GM Compels any more than the awarding of Bennies in Savage Worlds. Maybe I'm wrong here, but it's entirely up to the GM when they want to Compel someone, or to hand out a Bennie. Yes, there are guidelines about when to do so, they're just too vague for my tastes. You raise a valid point Hyve. This speaks to one of my fundamental precepts which is this, (only slightly less well known than, "Never get involved in a land war in Asia...") what makes a game work is the implicit contract of play established between the participants." With a rules intensive system (GURPS, Hero, etc) that contract is based in the rules as written. With an open system such as Fate that contract is based on the agreement between the participants. Now, while I like both and both are a ton of fun there is a caveat here, and that is yet another of JiB's precepts. The system doesn't matter, it's who you game with that matters and determines what the game will be. The only actual Fate Core game I have played was run at OrcCon by Mike Olson and had as players Mook, m'self, Gina, Jasmine (a friend who also plays in both of Mook's games) and Rob Sanderson (of Conquering Corsairs fame) all of whom are just f'ing amazing players. Mike had a totally awesome setup for the game and is a fabulous gm. The point being, the game system works for me, I dig it, but it was the people sitting around the table that really made the game. Cheers, JiB
|
|
|
Post by savagedaddy on Mar 7, 2013 8:47:58 GMT -8
I totally get that, and realize that nothing is wrong with the system. To be cliche here, it's not you, it's me. I don't really care for the nature of FATE-style GM Compels any more than the awarding of Bennies in Savage Worlds. Maybe I'm wrong here, but it's entirely up to the GM when they want to Compel someone, or to hand out a Bennie. Yes, there are guidelines about when to do so, they're just too vague for my tastes. You raise a valid point Hyve. This speaks to one of my fundamental precepts which is this, (only slightly less well known than, "Never get involved in a land war in Asia...") what makes a game work is the implicit contract of play established between the participants." With a rules intensive system (GURPS, Hero, etc) that contract is based in the rules as written. With an open system such as Fate that contract is based on the agreement between the participants. Now, while I like both and both are a ton of fun there is a caveat here, and that is yet another of JiB's precepts. The system doesn't matter, it's who you game with that matters and determines what the game will be. The only actual Fate Core game I have played was run at OrcCon by Mike Olson and had as players Mook, m'self, Gina, Jasmine (a friend who also plays in both of Mook's games) and Rob Sanderson (of Conquering Corsairs fame) all of whom are just f'ing amazing players. Mike had a totally awesome setup for the game and is a fabulous gm. The point being, the game system works for me, I dig it, but it was the people sitting around the table that really made the game. Cheers, JiB I have nothing to add, except for 'Outstanding Princess Bride Reference'! Oh, and of course... INCONCEIVABLE!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2013 16:48:32 GMT -8
The way a Compel works in FATE is not that the GM is telling the players to do something, the Player is already doing something and the GM is giving them a FATE point to complicate the action they are already taking. They then narrate that complication themselves and resolve their own action. Its essentially the player getting a reward for allowing the GM to raise the difficulty rating on the task they are attempting.
And really the rule is only there to keep the FATE economy going in the cases where you have players who won't self compel, since with out FATE points your capabilities are extremely limited. It also adds to the Pulpy feel that the game has at its base, even with the new FATE Core, where its high dramatic action with complications arising from everywhere that the hero must overcome.
For instance in a one shot I ran recently to introduce the game to a bunch of people at my game shop recently one player was goblin theif. She went to attack a guard and as she rolled to attack I compelled her "Oooh Shiny" aspect and she decided to be distracted by the silver crucifix he was wearing. She accepted FATE point for the compel and I gave a modifier to her role, usually I go with a standard minus 2. I didn't tell her what to do, what I did was thrown a wrench at her and let her build her narrative around it.
|
|