Currently, my group are playing Deus Vult. At the end of every session we receive IP's, which we get to spend on skills we have used during the session. I have no problem with this methord, but I cannot find the rule in either the RQII or Legend CRB's. I know it is written in CoC, Stormbringer, RQ, et al from the late 70's and early 80's. Is this rule just a given from these early games or is it written in a recent book? The current rules seem to suggest that any skill can be improved even if it has never been used since character generation.
Spending IP's
- Thread starter Big Orc
- Start date
There is the example of skill improvement in the the Legends RPGBig Orc said:
on page 70:
As I read it, this means that the character can only improve a skill
he has used recently, either during the last adventure or during so-
me practice in the off time after the adventure and before the next
adventure.
Big Orc said:
It can, in my view, and I allow it in my own campaign - it is never explicitly stated that only skills used can be improved. But remember, if you take the rules literally you shouldn't receive IP at the end of each sessions or something like that, but only when the adventurers are in a safe area and have time to practice and reflect on their experiences. This way, it is implied that any skills increased are of course practiced during the down-time.
In my experience though, players tend to use the IP on skill they have failed at during the session...
- Dan
Sorry for nitpicking, but this seems a bit too general and ge-Loz said:
nerous. The character should at least have sufficient time and
a plausible access to what is required for the use of a skill, like
a mount when he wants to improve his riding skill or a lot of
water if he wants to improve his swimming skill, because other-
wise the campaign is in danger to become rather silly. :wink:
Loz
Mongoose
Much depends on the setting and the GM. You're right; logic dictates that you have access to resources that will support the skill improvement, and so, if the GM is allowing IPs every session then it makes sense to limit skill picks to those that can be supported.
However in many cases GMs award IPs at the end of the story, which then assumes that characters are in downtime and able to find access to things they want/need.
The IP award system is structured in the way it is for several reasons.
1. To allow characters to develop holistically. If you limit IP spend to skills recently used, then you'll find similar skills being improved at a much faster rate than others. What do you do if your character didn't use a skill at all during an adventure (it can happen)?
2. To get away from the old BRP trope of only increasing skills successfully used. Again, what if you failed in a skill roll due to simple bad luck? In a session where combat was a principal focus, only combat skills would get the chance for improvement.
3. To encourage players to improve skills reflecting their culture and profession, rather than just those that seem obvious for direct game use.
Also many skills don't need additional resources: just time for practice and consideration.
Of course, it can work as has been suggested, but the intent of the rules - and this is why there's no specific statement that only recently used skills can be improved - is to create flexibility and diversity. Is it too generous? No, I don't think so. Much depends on frequency of awards rather than the way in which skills are improved, or even which skills are improved. In my recent Arthurian campaign, which operated on highly compressed timelines and IP awards every two sessions, it took some time for characters to reach dizzying skill heights, and the players quickly realised that diversity of IP spend was very important.
However in many cases GMs award IPs at the end of the story, which then assumes that characters are in downtime and able to find access to things they want/need.
The IP award system is structured in the way it is for several reasons.
1. To allow characters to develop holistically. If you limit IP spend to skills recently used, then you'll find similar skills being improved at a much faster rate than others. What do you do if your character didn't use a skill at all during an adventure (it can happen)?
2. To get away from the old BRP trope of only increasing skills successfully used. Again, what if you failed in a skill roll due to simple bad luck? In a session where combat was a principal focus, only combat skills would get the chance for improvement.
3. To encourage players to improve skills reflecting their culture and profession, rather than just those that seem obvious for direct game use.
Also many skills don't need additional resources: just time for practice and consideration.
Of course, it can work as has been suggested, but the intent of the rules - and this is why there's no specific statement that only recently used skills can be improved - is to create flexibility and diversity. Is it too generous? No, I don't think so. Much depends on frequency of awards rather than the way in which skills are improved, or even which skills are improved. In my recent Arthurian campaign, which operated on highly compressed timelines and IP awards every two sessions, it took some time for characters to reach dizzying skill heights, and the players quickly realised that diversity of IP spend was very important.
Prime_Evil
Emperor Mongoose
Would it be reasonable to let characters improve any skills but to charge slightly more for those skills that they have not used recently? This would make it possible to learn any skill, but make it more expensive to develop skills in areas where the adventurer has little practical experience. Alternatively, would it be reasonable to multiply training times by 1.5 for skills that the character is not using?
Loz
Mongoose
Prime_Evil said:
I think that Big Orc's situation is perfectly reasonable if that's the way the GM has chosen for IPs to be given out. If its every session, with little downtime between activities, then limiting IPs to only recently used skills is fine. I don't think you need to increase the IP cost. Doing so would make each IP increase session (potentially) quite divisive. I'm sure that you'd get players arguing ad-nauseam about how they can justify their choice of increase.
Prime_Evil
Emperor Mongoose
I take your point, Loz. I remember occasional arguments in older BRP games around whether people had used a skill successfully and forgotten to cross it off. There's certainly a danger of ending up in similar arguments again.
Loz
Mongoose
One effect I've noticed with not limiting which skills can be improved is that players become aware of a wider range of skills and make use of them.
If you continually improve skills you've recently improved, players can become blinkered. If they have the opportunity to scan their character sheet, see the options and make an investment, there's a greater likelihood of them remembering they have a particular skill and then using it later.
May not work in all groups, but it certainly has in mine. I continually see an innovative use of diverse skills.
If you continually improve skills you've recently improved, players can become blinkered. If they have the opportunity to scan their character sheet, see the options and make an investment, there's a greater likelihood of them remembering they have a particular skill and then using it later.
May not work in all groups, but it certainly has in mine. I continually see an innovative use of diverse skills.
I stopped worrying about this years ago.
As far as I am concerned, they have the IPs and can spend them on whatever they want. Normally, I only allow them a possible characteristic increase if they have done something spectacular using that characteristic or have used it often and regularly in the past.
That way, it allows the players to shape their PCs however they want.
I've also merged Hero Points and Improvement Points together, in the same way as in HeroQuest, so they can choose whether to hoard Hero Points or improve skills.
As far as I am concerned, they have the IPs and can spend them on whatever they want. Normally, I only allow them a possible characteristic increase if they have done something spectacular using that characteristic or have used it often and regularly in the past.
That way, it allows the players to shape their PCs however they want.
I've also merged Hero Points and Improvement Points together, in the same way as in HeroQuest, so they can choose whether to hoard Hero Points or improve skills.
Prime_Evil
Emperor Mongoose
As an aside, I believe the GM should actively encourage adventurers to use a range of skills during play, rewarding innovative uses of skills that don't usually get much "spotlight time". I always try to include one or two opportunities to use some of these "low-profile" skills in every adventure. Often, I will include a challenge that can be quickly resolved through the use of a skill that doesn't receive a lot of attention. Alternatively, I give the players who have developed these skills a chance to achieve a benefit that is not available to other characters- such as an opportunity to impress the princess with their dancing skills or a chance to find a hidden passage using their knowledge of stoneworking techniques. If you don't offer a variety of challenges, players tend to fall back on the same tired repertoire of skills every time. The old saying states that if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail, but the reverse also holds true - if you are only given nails, you aren't ever going to want any tool but a hammer.
We've had this discussion in my group, on several occasions. I introduced that only recently used skills could have an IR spent on them - whether the use was successful or not is immaterial, as you often learn just as much by failing at something as you do succeeding. I don't see the logic in allowing skills that haven't been used to benefit from an IR, however I did miss the line regarding practising the skill during down-time.
In a recent session, things nearly ended up in a bar fight. Unfortunately, Unarmed is not a skill most of the guys put any points in and they realised this would be a useful skill to have higher than its base score. They took on a job of caravan guards and I allowed them to practice their 'unarmed' skill when setting up camp for the night under the tutelage of the player that did have points in unarmed. As they were only practising for a couple of hours each day I gave them an IR-for unarmed only, each fortnight of GT. At the end of the first fortnight, I gave the 'instructor' the Teaching skill at it's base value.
In a recent session, things nearly ended up in a bar fight. Unfortunately, Unarmed is not a skill most of the guys put any points in and they realised this would be a useful skill to have higher than its base score. They took on a job of caravan guards and I allowed them to practice their 'unarmed' skill when setting up camp for the night under the tutelage of the player that did have points in unarmed. As they were only practising for a couple of hours each day I gave them an IR-for unarmed only, each fortnight of GT. At the end of the first fortnight, I gave the 'instructor' the Teaching skill at it's base value.
Olaus Petrus
Mongoose
Personally I hate limitation that you can only improve skill which you succesfully used during the last adventure. It's not as bad as the method which some popular RPGs use, where you can only select skills from the list based on your level and character class, but it's almost as bad.
In games where you need succesful skill use before you can spend IP, my characters usually end up being good at fighting and first aid but bad at everything else, despite my attempts to become good at variety of skills. And when I try to do completely unnecessary stuff so that I can get succesful skill rolls to romantic poetry or morris dancing it just makes other players annoyed, because they want to continue hunting the bandits instead of spending time to describing in detail what their characters do on the campfire (This happens especially when the party is large and individual characters don't get much "screen time", with smaller party more game time can be spent to their individual hobbies and interests).
As a GM I prefer that people train their morris dancing or romantic poetry skills during the downtime (unless there's actually a chance to impress someone with those skills), which is sometimes longer than actual adventuring time. Sometimes adventure lasts less than a day, while downtime can be entire week after that. So, I don't know why player characters should be able to train only those skills which they used during the single day of adventuring, but not those skills which they used during the downtime. If player character wants to spend his downtime writing poetry and morris dancing, then I let him improve those skills instead of sword fighting.
EDIT: I should add that I only give IPs when players are in a safe location and have at least few days of downtime, because I dislike the idea that people improve their skills during the adventure. One lucky shot during the battle doesn't make you better archer, but it's the constant practise during the downtime which improves your skill.
In games where you need succesful skill use before you can spend IP, my characters usually end up being good at fighting and first aid but bad at everything else, despite my attempts to become good at variety of skills. And when I try to do completely unnecessary stuff so that I can get succesful skill rolls to romantic poetry or morris dancing it just makes other players annoyed, because they want to continue hunting the bandits instead of spending time to describing in detail what their characters do on the campfire (This happens especially when the party is large and individual characters don't get much "screen time", with smaller party more game time can be spent to their individual hobbies and interests).
As a GM I prefer that people train their morris dancing or romantic poetry skills during the downtime (unless there's actually a chance to impress someone with those skills), which is sometimes longer than actual adventuring time. Sometimes adventure lasts less than a day, while downtime can be entire week after that. So, I don't know why player characters should be able to train only those skills which they used during the single day of adventuring, but not those skills which they used during the downtime. If player character wants to spend his downtime writing poetry and morris dancing, then I let him improve those skills instead of sword fighting.
EDIT: I should add that I only give IPs when players are in a safe location and have at least few days of downtime, because I dislike the idea that people improve their skills during the adventure. One lucky shot during the battle doesn't make you better archer, but it's the constant practise during the downtime which improves your skill.
Well, the solution to that is to not draw such a hard distinction between adventuring and 'downtime'. This doesn't mean that every minute of downtime is played out - weeks can pass by with a few statements of intent and abstracted skill checks, just as tens, even hundreds of miles can pass in minutes during an adventure. 'Playing' downtime - at the lowest level of resolution - ties PCs into the world in which they live, making clearing out those bandits a real problem for them as 'people', not a source of IP/XP and loot.
And only up to a week between adventures! 52 'adventures' in a year? Your PCs must be physical and psychological wrecks!
And only up to a week between adventures! 52 'adventures' in a year? Your PCs must be physical and psychological wrecks!
Olaus Petrus
Mongoose
DrBargle said:
I think it's enough that they throw improvement rolls to see how much they managed to improve their skill with the downtime practise. Making them roll skill rolls and then improvement rolls is just unnecessary and gives too much power to dice rolls. If you manage to find opportunity to train something, then you probably manage to learn something during that training, either it's just 1% or 1d4+1%. And I actually make them roleplay some downtime events, when there's time and reason for that, because it makes the world more real and it's fun.
Week was just an example from my current campaign, naturally downtime can be longer. My PCs are in a situation where they have an item in their possession, which several cults believe to be rightfully theirs. And unfortunately for the PCs cultists know that they have it, so downtimes have tendency to be rather short because it's dangerous to stay in one place for too long and sanctuaries are rare luxury. Naturally I occasionally give them some downtime, because playing long adventure (10+ sessions, divided to episodes of 1-3 sessions) without any chance to improve skills or gain hero points would be just cruel.
Similar threads
