Dare I ask...

Jennkryst

@derp BRB, gotta go earn a black belt before I can put in this Martial Arts skill request.

Grayson

@arkandel Really? I've had a very different, more complicated experience. But I'm in Mage sphere so there may be different policies in each sphere.

My Shifter-sphere character hasn't had any problems with spending XP. My Mage-sphere character needs to justify a skill spend more than I already did, preferably by using it in RP.

Arkandel

(This is derailing the thread's topic)

There are two fundamental problems with justification requirements.

The first is that they cannot be universal unless it's a single-sphere game, and that creates an additional barrier to character progression - one that's based on the player, not their PC. The Vampire raising Blood Potence? "Uh, my blood got stronger I guess!" The Uratha raising Renown? "... Let me find someone to run a PrP chain, hope the dice which need to be challenging don't kill the PC, find someone IC to spin the deed and then write a small essay."

The second is the very purpose of having justification requirements in the first place isn't consistent in general. If it's to promote IC plausibility then no character on the grid should ever raise their Medicine over 3 unless they start high; that stuff takes years! If it's to ensure only the top players with most robust understanding of the rules rise in power or skill then why tie it to IC achievements in the first place?

These are essentially home grown systems-within-systems.

faraday

@arkandel said in Dare I ask...:

The second is the very purpose of having justification requirements in the first place isn't consistent in general. If it's to promote IC plausibility then no character on the grid should ever raise their Medicine over 3 unless they start high; that stuff takes years!

Exactly. On my BSG game I wouldn't just let someone randomly raise Medicine to doctor levels or pick up Demolitions or become a Viper Pilot on a whim because there's no path there for IC progression. I don't care how much XP they have; it doesn't make any sense.(*)

The rules were clear and consistent. If you just don't like it that's cool - everyone has their preferences. We all have different levels at which our suspension of disbelief becomes tweaked. But I don't see how you can say that such policies are universally unfair or inconsistent.

(*) ETA: Unless of course you do a plotline where your character applies for a transfer, GETS the Viper training or whatever, and then it might.

reversed

My most recent XP spend justification thing was for a dot in a background that lets PCs access an NPC information exchange.

My justification was one part an actual reason, which is that the IC world is getting more chaotic and my character would seek out ways of finding relaliable intel. The other part was a bit about how the character gains access, which was "renewing their account and apologizing to a moderator whom they viciously trolled" along with examples of the trolling.

The response from staff: "?"

So the moral is, have fun with it.

Derp

@jennkryst said in Dare I ask...:

@derp BRB, gotta go earn a black belt before I can put in this Martial Arts skill request.

I mean, you joke, but we've all seen the master of Wing Chun who does the aerial shaolin jump-around nonsense that makes you go 'you did not even so much as google wing chun, huh?'.

I don't expect you to be able to do the things the character can, but I expect you to have done some research on the thing. If you want to be world-class at something, I expect you to know what world-class means. If you have -- example, Athletics 5 with a specialty in Figure Skating and you're telling me that you're an olympic figure-skating gold medalist, then yeah, I expect you to have done some research on it. I don't need you to be able to do a triple lutz, but I expect you to be able to tell me what a triple lutz is. If you're going for a 5 with that kind of a background, I might even expect you to know gasp figure skating rules, and to tell the difference between a triple axle and a triple lutz.

You wanna play an elite-level thing, then I expect you to be knowledgeable enough to portray it. If you don't wanna do that work, then you don't get that thing. It's really just that straightforward. If you want the shiny thing, then you do the work to get the shiny thing.

Also, a black belt is the martial arts equivalent of a high school diploma. It shows that you know just enough not to hurt yourself and can probably be trusted in some basic supervision and instruction. You aren't at the peak of the mountain.

Just saying.

@misadventure said in Dare I ask...:

@derp That ... doesn't sound like any xp justification I've ever heard of.

Could you give an example for a mundane skill and some sort of magical power?

OK, so, sticking with WoD examples, I assume for mundane skills the progression of Novice, Practiced, Competent, Expert, Master. So a justification would ideally look something like this:

***Spammy WoD XP Justification***

click to show

Maybe also including some logs or something of him using some of his fancy new moves.

Magical abilities, especially for Mage, are the real reason why I started insisting on them in the first place. Because I can't force you to read the book before you play. But I can make damn sure you've read it before I approve you to raise anything. You will not 'just learn it IC'. #SorryNotSorry

I expect you to tell me where and how you're learning it, what it can do, and how it feels / looks / manifests from your character. I want you to show me that you know what this arcanum both can and cannot do. I don't expect you to memorize every possible spell permutation, but I want to know that you know what the Compelling practices are fairly limited, so that you don't try to conjure up dancing dragons of fire with your mighty Forces 1 because 'all you are doing is moving the candle flame that is already there omg!'

This is a ridiculously quick one because I'm at work and can't do a proper one, but something might look like:

***Even Moar Spammier WoD XP Justification***

click to show

Fate 1 - Samael's Awakening to the Watchtower of the Golden Key flavors his perceptions of the Fate arcanum. Samael sees the workings of Fate as the work of the angels, understanding the destiny of a subject as their place in the Unknowable End Result of the Great Mechanism of the Aether. His mentor, Ganapati, has been instructing him in the Mysteries of Fate.

Knowing - Ganapati's teachings have allowed Samael to reach out with his Supernal Will and draw back basic information about a subject he is examining or a situation he is participating in. By reading the brands of the angels on a subject's skin, Samael can discern what oaths the subject has broken or fulfilled -- broken oaths appear as scratched and corrupted text, rusted and vile. Fulfilled oaths appear to be pristine, and made of precious metals. By examining the position of the Gears of the Great Mechanism, Samael can determine what adjustments need to be made in order to reconfigure the Mechanism in a way favorable to him, or disfavorable to an enemy.

Unveiling - Ganapati has also showed him how to simply extend his senses with Fate and view the Supernal Symbols as it exists around him, gleaning information from what he sees. The sympathies between individuals appear as ribbons of pure red energy, coiled around and between every individual and, occasionally, even pieces of the environment in some way important to their place in the working of the Great Mechanism, angels dancing between them to create and sever new connections. Occasionally, with concentration, Samael can glean information based on the appearance of the divine beings -- a pair of former lovers in close proximity will have a pair of angels dancing between them suggestively, their marble masks hard and mocking, their movements full of tension and revulsion even as they move through their 'romantic' dance.

Compelling - The trickiest of the Practices, Samael has now gotten comfortable with the basics of compelling -- making minor adjustments to the workings of the Great Mechanism, or quietly entreating the angels to act on his behalf in very minor ways that don't deviate too much from how they otherwise might have gone. He might ask them to stand by his side as he completes his task, warding off obstacles and pointing out the path he needs to take. Alternatively, he can choose to trust in his knowledge of the workings of the Great Mechanism, making an immediate adjustment for a small change down the line. Neither method is without risk -- the angels may ignore him, and his knowledge of the Machine is imperfect at best. Abuse of these methods are likely to backfire spectacularly, as angels are not beings to be treated as servants, and the Great Machine's gears are as likely to chew Samael to shreds as alter their course, and direct control of the Fallen World through the workings of Fate is still far beyond his abilities.

Ganymede

@arkandel said in Dare I ask...:

The first is that they cannot be universal unless it's a single-sphere game, and that creates an additional barrier to character progression - one that's based on the player, not their PC.

How so?

Derp employs a very strict requirement on what a justification ought to look like, and yet I have never had one rejected for content. I have overlooked raise limitations, but that's a procedural thing.

Frankly, there are only two reasons it is ever a barrier: (1) because a player feels it so; and (2) a pretext for playing favorites by staff. Neither is a good reason not to have them.

The second is the very purpose of having justification requirements in the first place isn't consistent in general. If it's to promote IC plausibility then no character on the grid should ever raise their Medicine over 3 unless they start high.

This is a bad thing? I would love it if staff actually enforced this.

popes

I don't play any WoD games right now, but as a player, I do not like required justifications. If I wanted to do pretendy fun time homework, I'd go play EVE and do spreadsheets for hours. To me, XP, and the progression it's used for, are player rewards, not character rewards.

You want me to grind my face off in RP to get that status or (oWoD) reknown? Fuck yes, I will meat grinder it. You want me to justify buying a dot in a skill? I'll just never spend xp and sit on it forever rather than having to do homework.

My point being: You want me to put in the work quote-unquote, I will hit those scenes and roleplay all of the goddamn strife and consequences there would ever be. I will not write an essay to spend my, the player's, reward for that roleplay.

Derp

@popes

I mean, sure, that's one way to look at it. Boo, homework, or whatever.

But that's certainly not the only way to look at it.

Another way to look at it is that the 'homework' that you are putting into 'your' pretendy-funtimes game is a way to ensure that it is richer, deeper, and more accurate than it would have been otherwise. Because at the end of the day, it isn't your pretendy funtimes game. It's our pretendy-funtimes game. And part of that means putting in the legwork to ensure that we are playing the same game, which is where a LOT of games miss the mark. You don't have players playing the same game, under the same rules, under the same vision. You have several different cohorts playing different games under a vaguely similar structure with wildly different results and themes, resulting in an incoherent mess.

Nothing ruins the immersion and fun of pretendy funtimes games like a person coming in going completely against the grain of what everyone else is doing, not having put the work in to make sure everyone is on the same page.

I mean, personally, I get why someone wouldn't want to do it. I really do. It's a lot of work if you're just in it to do something quick and easy or whatever, assuming no consequences outside of your own little bubble. But that's rarely the case.

So I require them. And if players don't want to do them -- I'm not gonna hate on ya'll.

You just aren't gonna play in the space I set up.

You're gonna be writing this stuff over and over again in play in the future, presumably. You can take an hour, or a day, or whatever, to write up an outline of what that might look like going forward so that we can hash it out.

And if that's too much of a hurdle, there are plenty of other games out there, you know?

Again, no hate or judgment or whatever. But me, personally? I need to know that I, as an administrator, am on the same page with my players. That they know what I expect of them. That I know what they're expecting of me. That we both have a shared understanding of where that character fits.

And I put that right up front on the tin. No surprises.

faraday

@derp said in Dare I ask...:

And I put that right up front on the tin. No surprises.

Yeah, as long as you're up front about it, people can make their own decisions as to whether a game is right for them.

For me? XP is NOT a player reward, it's an IC thing. That's why on FS3 games everybody receives the same static XP award each week.

Chargen represents your character's life up to the point you start playing them. XP represents your character's growth since then. The player doesn't enter into it in the slightest.

So if you want to improve your athletics or learn Spanish? I assume your character is just spending their free time hitting the gym or doing Rosetta Stone. If you want to learn demolitions or earn a M.D. though? I want to know how exactly you plan on doing that, because that's not just something somebody casually picks up.

But like Derp said - I realize that's not the only way to look at it. That's just the way I look at it, and that's how my games are structured. If that's not what you're looking for, no hard feelings.

il-volpe

My recent-ish experience with this was, uh, "You cannot learn firearms 3 by practicing, you have to shoot at things in a GMed scene." Since GMed scenes, and hence opportunities to shoot at things in GMed scenes, were not forthcoming (for me), I would have to +request My character would like to go on a rampage for no particular reason, I will attack the lover's lane on prom night with my glock 9. Or something of that ilk.

Derp

@il-volpe said in Dare I ask...:

My recent-ish experience with this was, uh, "You cannot learn firearms 3 by practicing, you have to shoot at things in a GMed scene." Since GMed scenes, and hence opportunities to shoot at things in GMed scenes, were not forthcoming (for me), I would have to +request My character would like to go on a rampage for no particular reason, I will attack the lover's lane on prom night with my glock 9. Or something of that ilk.

I wouldn't let you buy firearms 3 by going to a shooting range.

I would absolutely let you buy firearms 3 by participating regularly in competitive paintball.

Firearms 1 and 2 is for stationary targets. 3 is where you can hit a moving target consistently and accurately from something greater than point blank range. 4 is where you start getting into professional sniper, and 5 is like -- you made your own gun that you've been firing for 20 years and now it is basically an extension of your body.

il-volpe

@derp Cool beans, and I can think of other ways to practice that, all of which can reasonably occur off-camera and don't depend on me being in the reindeer games.

Wizz

Yyyyeah.

Writing an essay, sure, whatever. Seems a little much, but I can see it from the other angle laid out here and respect it.

Requiring not only an essay but specifically for it to occur on camera in a GM'd scene that said GM may or may not ever actually run and any particular player might not have a chance to participate in for any of a million reasons is just someone being a control freak, imho.

Cr0ak3r

This post is deleted!