Quote from: Elliot WilenIn order for something to be a "reward" it has to be something you actually want, which acts as an incentive to do something.

I think, then, that there are at least two types of "rewards".  There are "incentives" and there are "acknowledgments".  My group uses "good idea points" more as an acknowledgment that a player contributed something cool to the session than an incentive to think up cool things.

Quote from: TonyLBI've clearly misinterpreted you ... which is precisely why I asked whether I'd gotten what you were saying right.  Can you possibly explain it another way, and I'll make another try at understanding?

HI Tony:

I think it was me that misread your post. Re-reading it when I'm not pressed for time, I think it's exactly what I meant, just from a different direction.

-clash

Quote from: John MorrowI think, then, that there are at least two types of "rewards".  There are "incentives" and there are "acknowledgments".  My group uses "good idea points" more as an acknowledgment that a player contributed something cool to the session than an incentive to think up cool things.

That wasn't really the direction I was going. (That's something that's still percolating in my mind.) But I'd like to look at it anyway.

Why bother acknowledging cool contributions? How would your game be different with or without the acknowledgment?

Quote from: Elliot WilenWhy bother acknowledging cool contributions? How would your game be different with or without the acknowledgment?

 It reminds me of the argument for and against giving bonus XP for "good roleplaying."  Just about every game book I have mentions that in the GM section.  Something like "1 point for showing up, 1 point for bringing snacks, 1 point for drawing the map or keeping a game journal, 1 point for good roleplaying, etc..."  

To some, the good roleplaying bonus is a way of encouraging quiet players to speak up and rewarding active players for their contributions.  Others see it as a way of giving loudmouths incentive to keep hogging the spotlight (suppressing quiet players) and bribing non-interested players into play with mechanical rewards (which people uninterested in the game wouldn't care about anyway, so it fails.)

Now, non-mechanical rewards (accolades and praise) are just being polite.  If a guy impresses you with his narratives ("does something cool") then he should be patted on the back, thanked, or whatever.  Do you not applaud at the end of a good play?  Then at least toss your friend a "Hey, that's was awesome dude!" when something is neat.

A topic for another thread, but that's also a metagame reward mechanic: one built into most societies.  It's also a more effective method of drawing out quiet or uninterested gamers than trying to give them more XP.

It's all economic, and I should really write my thoughts on that down at length as well.

Quote from: Elliot WilenWhy bother acknowledging cool contributions? How would your game be different with or without the acknowledgment?

Why applause a band when they are done playing?  After all, you are paying them to play and they are already done?  It's a nice gesture.  

We don't always include them.  Sometimes we do.  Sometimes we don't.  Often it's spontaneous.  I don't think it really changes the game all that much either way.

Quote from: John MorrowWhy applause a band when they are done playing?  

That's a good metaphor to express what I find irritating about games with too strongly foregrounded in-game reward mechanics: Our band is trying to play this song, and there's this constant clapping of hands going on in the background. I wish they'd just let us play--we'd be enjoying ourselves more.

Quote from: John MorrowWhy applause a band when they are done playing?  After all, you are paying them to play and they are already done?  It's a nice gesture.  

We don't always include them.  Sometimes we do.  Sometimes we don't.  Often it's spontaneous.  I don't think it really changes the game all that much either way.

Thanks. Also--on rereading, my question was much more abrubt than I intended. I hope you didn't take it as a rhetorical "why bother?"

Quote from: Pierce InverarityThat's a good metaphor to express what I find irritating about games with too strongly foregrounded in-game reward mechanics: Our band is trying to play this song, and there's this constant clapping of hands going on in the background. I wish they'd just let us play--we'd be enjoying ourselves more.

See, now I'm running aground on what it is that you're getting out of D&D.  Do you actually roll any dice outside of combat, or are you basically just freeform storytelling with a combat engine attached for when you get bored of talking?  I'm not saying any method is bad, I'm just trying to figure out what your doing.

Because to me, in Exalted for example, "Take 2 stunt dice for that awesome description" is the least disruptive part of play, far behind other things like: rolling 20 dice at once and counting up successes (twice per attack), working out how much essence I want to spend on charms this round, adding up all the bonuses from charms, figuring out the penality to my defense value, and so on and so forth.  

Likewise, I've never had a problem with XP interfering with fun.  I tabulate it up during the session, and hand out points at the end of the night.  Usually, everyone gets the same points, though sometimes I'll toss out an extra here and there if someone was just really impressive during play.  

I'm at a loss for how you can find reward mechanics so intrusive, and now I'm just really curious as to what kind of gaming goes on in your group.

Quote from: TonyLBWhat can I say ... I'm a Spiderman fan

It has shattered my faith in humanity that a "Threat or Menace" Google image search has yielded no Spider-man artwork to post here. A fucking Doonesbury strip, but no Spidey.


So far, that's all I would have had to contribute to this thread. Carry on. :cool:

Peace,
-Joel

Quote from: CodexArcanumSee, now I'm running aground on what it is that you're getting out of D&D.  Do you actually roll any dice outside of combat, or are you basically just freeform storytelling with a combat engine attached for when you get bored of talking?

What do you mean "just," kid?

As I said, not all of us are Club Med tourists. Some of us just pay for the flight and take off on our own.

A disappointment to those who want to run our vacation for us, but hey. It's our vacation, and we know best how to reward ourselves.

Quote from: Pierce InverarityWhat do you mean "just," kid?

As I said, not all of us are Club Med tourists. Some of us just pay for the flight and take off on our own.

A disappointment to those who want to run our vacation for us, but hey. It's our vacation, and we know best how to reward ourselves.

I don't want to push to much, and I'm certainly not going to throw in a "just," but I am actually curious as to how you play - like in an actual play way or something. It sounds interesting.  Another thread?  An actual play post?  Or tell me to shove off...

I think the Club Med metaphor is throwing me off, please just say what you actually do, and stop dancing around with the distracting language.

Also, I didn't mean to imply that you were "just" freeform roleplaying.  I've freeformed plenty of times myself and I'm not saying that a reward mechanic is an essential part of any game design.  Pretty much nothing is essential except some friends and some imagination.  But it'd be a boring world full of unsatisfied gamers if every book was a freeform, systemless game.

I'm not sure how this happened, but it looks like this is a simple misunderstanding. I'm not saying I've been playing in these l33t D&D groups where we all have mad improv skillz or anything.

I was getting at what I thought was a simple distinction between two different kinds of rewards that are related to two different kinds of rules. In D&D and a zillion other games, you get in-game rewards for combat and not much else, and that reward is doled out at the end of a session (xp), ie after play is over.

In other games, you a) get a stream of rewards in-game; b) including for roleplaying. I dislike that intuitively, though I realize it's a matter of taste. To me, when people play their characters well, a good time is had by all: the play itself is the reward. To be rewarded by the game on top of that feels redundant to me. And to be forced by the game to roleplay well (and according to the game's definition of "well") in order to get a reward feels constrictive and instrumentalizing.

Quote from: Pierce InverarityTo be rewarded by the game on top of that feels redundant to me. And to be forced by the game to roleplay well (and according to the game's definition of "well") in order to get a reward feels constrictive and instrumentalizing.

Oh, I see what you mean now.  Yeah, I can agree with that.