Respecs.
-
This will be a very open topic.
How do you feel about allowing/offering respecs - rebuilding an existing character using their current XP but picking traits, powers etc from scratch - in a game?
Should there be limitations? What problems can arise from the practice? How (and if) does it affect the game at large?
Discuss.
- He who takes offense when not intended is a fool. He who takes offense when intended is a greater fool.
-
This will be a very open topic.
How do you feel about allowing/offering respecs - rebuilding an existing character using their current XP but picking traits, powers etc from scratch - in a game?
Should there be limitations? What problems can arise from the practice? How (and if) does it affect the game at large?
Discuss.
I think if there is a respec policy it should be clearly laid out and enforced. Personally, I think it shouldn't be allowed to go to far (radical changes, like taking a leveled trait from 5 to 0 or vice-versa). Unless the POINT of a respec is radical changes, in which case, again, explicitly detailed. Also, if Staff decides to change something significantly (either because: it was House Ruled before and now it's not, it wssn't and now it is, it was custom and now something official is taking its place, or whatever) then any players with it who bought it because of what it used to do should be allowed to get a refund if they want.
-
@arkandel All games die. Here are my thoughts on respec.
Viewpoint 1: We're here to have fun.
Fun is the primary and overarching reason why we play games, and when you aren't having fun then there's no reason to keep playing. If a player is no longer having fun on a character and doesn't want to abandon the game, they should be allowed to respec. When you say "It breaks realism", you should step back and see that this is just a game, it's fake and pretend where adults spend time/effort to play a fantasy. Why does it matter if a player who is contributing positively to a game wants to respec the character? Why can't you hand wave inconsistencies on this while you hand wave inconsistencies throughout every game? We should focus most on player happiness and the pursuit of fun for as many as possible, and there is no game that will last forever. Remember that. No game lasts, so why not get the most fun while it does last? To put it in another way, if we were sitting around the table and someone went "I'm getting so bored but I love playing with you all, can we do something so this character can be respeced?" I'd be nodding yes, just as long as it wasn't simply temporary to overcome one challenge and then they go back. I want them to have fun.Viewpoint 2: It's not fair!
A character purchases and invests XP into their character based on rule sets, using said advantages (perceived or real) to have fun. When another player suddenly is able to abandon choices they no longer wish to be stuck with, it can create a sense of being upset or jealous by other players who for whatever reason desire to stick with their spec. In this viewpoint, I'd rather see the player roster their current character and make a new one. Or, let them create an NPC to try out these new respecs just to see how it feels (like taking clothes out of a closet, or try before you buy). Folks on this might also agree that if game mechanics change then players ought to be able to adjust accordingly.That said, I absolutely hate the vote XP system on any game. Every character should have the same XP given to them as a pool. GM's who make a roster system shouldn't punish those characters who the playerbase say aren't as relevant and hence not picked. Those players who can spend significant hours in a game, can effectively win at the social/political aspect of any game by getting popular can all benefit far more than others who might not be able to do these things. Is that fair? Not really. I haven't heard a reasonable viewpoint as to why any vote XP system still exists but now I'm derailing your thread!
Warning: snappy turtle is snappy.
Creating the world of Aesca. -
A character purchases and invests XP into their character based on rule sets, using said advantages (perceived or real) to have fun. When another player suddenly is able to abandon choices they no longer wish to be stuck with, it can create a sense of being upset or jealous by other players who for whatever reason desire to stick with their spec.
That part seems pretty unreasonable. Unless those players are somehow deprived of the same choice then why would they feel jealous about someone else taking advantage of a documented in-game process?
That said, I absolutely hate the vote XP system on any game. Every character should have the same XP given to them as a pool. GM's who make a roster system shouldn't punish those characters who the playerbase say aren't as relevant and hence not picked.
I should point out that if the playerbase considers someone to be irrelevant then their XP is the least of their problems.
Feel free to make a vote XP thread though, we might get a good debate out of it.
-
To be clear, I don't see this as a right-or-wrong issue. But my personal preference is to maintain continuity. Everybody has their own personal pet peeves, and continuity is mine. If something was true in RP yesterday, then I expect it to be true tomorrow - otherwise I feel adrift in terms of how to play my character. That's why I could never play on a game that allowed significant retcon to occur when a new character took over a role.
Respecs are like retcon to me. If you have RPed that your character is a virtuoso violinist in some significant way, then you can't just one day decide to take those points and put them into firearms instead. That breaks immersion for me.
Little things? Sure. If you realize a couple months in that you really should have a skill you forgot to buy in chargen, or want to swap your never-RPed hobby for some other never-RPed hooby? I'm happy to consider those on a case-by-case basis as long as they don't cause big ripples in what's already been RPed.
-
I think it's fine to respect something you have at a 1 or a 2, but not something you have at a 4 or a 5 unless you are FRESH out of CG and messed something up - like not realizing skills are duplicates, or something. A little cleanup is fine but changing a core aspect of the character as you have played/built them is not, imo.
-
I never do it but i have no issues if other people decide to, though I do feel there should be some limits, for example if Jane Vampire has fortitude and has used it in multiple scenes already she should have to keep fortitude when the process is over even is she gained it at a different point in the mechanical process than she did originally with the respec.
-
How do you feel about players using respecs to be more mechanically powerful in what they already specialize in?
For example let's say I make a swordsman in nWoD rules but I don't know about/realize how strong the Fencing fighting style is, so I don't pick it and now I'm capped in XP. Should the game give me the option of shaving XPs from elsewhere to buy the merit?
Also, what about games where the rules aren't publicized?
For example I make my swordsmanon a MU* with a custom fighting system whose mechanics are hidden behind commands, then down the line it's shown that swords suck but daggers rock! Can I switch?
- He who takes offense when not intended is a fool. He who takes offense when intended is a greater fool.
-
@arkandel Not just the rules, but the mechanics and calculations behind the rules aren't usually published and players get to find out sometimes in trial and error.
I honestly don't care if someone wants to respec. I'm creative enough that I can handle hand waving prior scenes, especially when the player is a positive presence and losing them is far worse than a character joining the hundreds rotting away on a roster.
-
I don't mind it. We're here to have fun, and if someone wants to readjust their character for WHATEVER reason, I don't see a problem with it. Pretty much everything can be explained in a reasonably IC fashion. The only thing I really care about is that it not happen every week/month -- having some sort of 'you can do this 1 time per 6 months' or w/e, just to keep the work involved low and to keep it from going from 'redo the character to make needed changes' to a way to actually play (these stats for one month, then those stats for another month, etc.).
-
I don't mind it. We're here to have fun, and if someone wants to readjust their character for WHATEVER reason, I don't see a problem with it. Pretty much everything can be explained in a reasonably IC fashion. The only thing I really care about is that it not happen every week/month -- having some sort of 'you can do this 1 time per 6 months' or w/e, just to keep the work involved low and to keep it from going from 'redo the character to make needed changes' to a way to actually play (these stats for one month, then those stats for another month, etc.).
^ This.
Also, allow folks to take NPC's out of the closet to try new things!
-
I think respecs are a pretty useful tool, as a player.
Sometimes I build a bad character and that hampers my ability to enjoy the game.
Sometimes the game isn't what I thought it was or my character ends up in a radically different niche than I planned and my initial choices don't work well with the theme of the game and my character's place in it.
Sometimes huge in-character things happen that are dramatically transformative. (In WoD and other fantasy games, this can be literal.)
I think one 'free' respec with little or no justification is reasonable and then after that, you have to have a pretty convincing IC or OOC reason and should be prepared to have staff turn you down.
-
How do you feel about players using respecs to be more mechanically powerful in what they already specialize in?
I would have no issue as long as it didn't fundamental change how the character has been seen on screen. Lets use your fencing example if the player shaved points like you said and took a point of academics and a point off drive and a point off investigation to make up the difference then no worries.
If they decided they didn't want academic and dropped it from 3 to zero to make up the difference even though they had been playing their character as a well educated person I would have issues.
To me the issue with respecs is a continuity one, changing numbers so a sword fighter becomes a better sword fighter doesn't bother me at all unless it in turn breaks something else when they drop other things to get the points. -
How do you feel about allowing/offering respecs - rebuilding an existing character using their current XP but picking traits, powers etc from scratch - in a game?
Should there be limitations?
I dislike re-specs, but I think they are a necessary benefit and evil.
As a policy, I'd allow for re-specs within 30 days of approval, which I think is reasonable for a WoD 2E game. After that, I'd allow for a re-spec when there has been a house rule that alters how a particular stat works; however, I would limit changes to the altered stat, or, on a case-by-case basis, a complete change where the stat may have been critical to the PC's concept.
Otherwise, no.
“It is better to live doing the things that you like. It is foolish to live within this dream of a world seeing unpleasantness and doing only things that you do not like.” -- Yamamoto Tsunetomo.
-
Not directed at anyone in particular...
I really wish folks would chill with the "remember it's just a game, let everyone have fun" stuff because it's basically saying "if you disagree with this you're against people having fun".
Yes, games are about having fun. But if fun were the only consideration then we wouldn't have stats, we wouldn't have game systems, and we wouldn't have non-consent policies. We'd just let players do whatever they want and have unfettered pretendy-fun-time fun.
But we don't. Because there's more at play here. What one group of folks views as "fun" might cause another group a decided amount of "un-fun". Even if you come down hard on one group's side or another, there should at least be a recognition that there are, actually, two (or more) equally-legitimate sides.
-
I'm generally for respecs in a couple of situations.
When someone has a concept but doesn't understand the system so their build doesn't necessarily reflect the concept as well as it good. The above example of Fencing merit. Someone that is supposed to be an expert swordsman should probably have a merit to reflect it.
and when the system changes things in a way that makes it so their build doesn't reflect their concept. Same thing with the master swordsman, but say the Fencing merit was a newly added house custom.
-
Or when your character stops hitting the gym and decides to take up crafts.macrame instead. Or is hit by a bus. I can think of a lot of simply IC reasons for characters to change without necessarily growing XP-wise.
-
I think most things like this are a balance between the enjoyment of one person and the continuity of the game or immersion of other players. Most wrongfun type stuff are arguments because one person's enjoyment is jarring for other people and they feel like it diminishes their fun, and I think it's just a careful compromise between the two, whether it's about theme, or minute details that are meaningful to one person because of their real world expertise, or allowed character types or PBs or anything.
For me I just allow respecs that don't change a character's core concept, would invalidate previous RP, or are too jarring because of degree. I think that limits the abuse cases while avoiding punishing simple mistakes.
-
Not directed at anyone in particular...
I really wish folks would chill with the "remember it's just a game, let everyone have fun"not to mention you can't let EVERYONE have fun, because the fun of one person is almost guaranteed to impact the fun of another person, likely negatively. For every freewheeling "FUCK THE RULES" char you approve, there's somewhere a player playing that char's authority figure in something that has to shoulder a lot of nonsense for that fun - to use an unrelated example.
-
@kanye-qwest Fun is a zero sum game. This is known.
